National Victory March turned into National Camping Out Day.

According to some estimates, 400,000 to 500,000 citizens turned up in central Seoul on Saturday to attend a peaceful National Victory March. That itself is a great achievement for the movement against the Lee Myung-bak government, given the fact that just a week ago protesters were seriously considering taking self-defensive measures (read: steel pipes and bats) in response to police violence and brutality.

Saturday reminded many people of the early days of protest in May: there was no violence on either side. Police didn’t provoke protesters, and protesters didn’t attempt to march to the presidential Blue House. Instead, various cultural and protest activities took place all over the major streets of central Seoul.

And as the night deepened, a substantial number of people simply camped out on the streets:

Unless the Lee Myung-bak government drastically changes its course of action and chooses to renegotiate over U.S. beef and give up on its privatization plans for national infrastructure industries, every Saturday will likely turn into a National Camping Out Day.

International Herald Tribune publishes a false report on the June 28th protest.

Choe Sang-hun, a South Korea correspondent of International Heread Tribune (IHT), writes today that “The demonstrators hurled rocks and swung steel pipes while the police beat them back with plastic shields.” But it was police that hurled rocks and kindred things, as we reported yesterday. And the claim that protesters used steel pipes is a complete lie, a lie that even radical right-wing propagandist daily newspapers in Korea would dare not publish. Choe’s report intentionally misleads the readers into thinking that police violence was a result of responding to prostesters’ violence, which only exists in Choe’s imagination.

New York Times, which owns IHT and regularly publishes Choe’s articles in their entirety, has wisely published Choe’s report on the June 28th protest with that false claim edited out. Choe’s reports on Korea have always been skewed to the right. If, as is reported by Reuters, “The New York Times is developing plans to merge the Web site of the International Herald Tribune with that of The New York Times, in a bid to expand their global reach and deepen their appeal to advertisers“, it’d be wise of NY Times to reconsider publishing articles on Korea by an unreliable reporter like Choe.

Police violence escalates into madness.

June 28, the fourth day of the National Action Week against the South Korean government’s publication of guidelines on U.S. beef imports, might turn out to be a turning point in political struggles of Korean people for health and human rights.

In phase with his decision to put into effect the April 18th beef imports agreement with the U.S., Lee Myung-bak made a decisive break from his previous apologetic tone this week, and the police returned to full-scale violence. However, June 28 marked a new height in police violence.

Here’s a video showing a female student being attacked by riot police last night:

Police threw various items including a fire extinguisher at protesters:

This video shows police throwing nuts and bolts at protesters, injuring a middle-aged woman:

So many Korean people shed blood last night. But police’s violence didn’t discriminate between Koreans and non-Koreans, or between citizens and journalists. Reportedly a German journalist was injured by police. And an American young man had the upper left part of his lip cut by an inch by a sharp-edged police shield:

As police violence escalates, citizens are now seriously considering some possible self-defense measures. We might be entering a new phase in civil protest in Korea.

[Update: June 28, 21:20]

Here’s another video showing police acting like rabid beasts.

KCTU (Korean Confederation of Trade Unions) announces a plan for a total strike.

Wednesday, June 25, the first day of the National Action Week, was marked by police’s violence against the protesters.

More than a hundred protesters including one grade schooler and two young moms carrying baby carts were forcibly arrested. Many more were attacked by the police who seemed quite willing to use sharp-edged shields against peacefully protesting citizens. Also, a rather surreal thing happened: a man in his fifties (shown below) had one of his fingers bitten off by a policeman:

Lee Myung-bak may have calculated that if the police aggressively respond to protesters on Wednesday, not too many people will take to the streets on this weekend.

That’s a mistake.

The Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU), the most powerful labor organization in Korea, has issued a notice of a set of guidelines for a total strike against the government’s decision to put into effect the April 18th beef import deal with the U.S.

Kim Jong-hoon’s shameless lies exposed.

As noted earlier, Kim Jong-hoon, the top South Korean trade envoy to Washington, held talks with Susan Schwab, the U.S. Trade Representative, over some controversial elements of the April 18th U.S. beef import agreement. Upon return to Korea, Kim held a press conference on the talks and claimed that the U.S. government agreed to verify that the beef from cattle older than 30 months will not be shipped to Korea for consumption. But as Schwab makes it clear in her statement quoted below, that’s only “a transitional measure, to improve Korean consumer confidence in U.S. beef”. More importantly, the Quality System Assessment (QSA) program is not enforced by the U.S. government but is an entirely voluntary measure that can be canceled at will by the U.S. beef exporters. All bold emphases mine:

USTR NEWS
UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE
www.ustr.gov Washington, D.C. 20508 202-395-3230
For Immediate Release: Contact:
June 21, 2008 Sean Spicer/Gretchen Hamel (202) 395-3230

USTR Confirms Korea’s Announcement on U.S. Beef Washington, DC — United States Trade Representative Susan C. Schwab made the following statement in response to the announcement by the South Korean government today regarding U.S. beef trade. The government announced that, as a result of recent discussions in Washington, Korea will put into effect the April 18th beef import protocol agreed to by the two governments and pave the way for U.S. beef to flow into the Korean market.

“I welcome the South Korean government’s announcement that it will shortly put the April 18 protocol into effect.
“Korean beef importers and U.S. exporters have reached a commercial understanding that only U.S. beef from cattle under 30-months of age will be shipped to Korea, as a transitional measure, to improve Korean consumer confidence in U.S. beef.
“At the request of U.S. exporters, once the protocol goes into effect, the U.S. government will facilitate this transitional private sector arrangement. The U.S. Department of Agriculture will set up a voluntary Quality System Assessment (QSA) Program once the protocol goes into effect. This program will verify that beef from participating plants will be from cattle less than 30 months of age.
“We have also agreed on a few additional clarifications to the April 18th protocol that we will implement once the protocol is in effect in an effort to increase the confidence of Korean consumers in U.S. beef.
“We look forward to safe, affordable, high-quality American beef – the same beef enjoyed by hundreds of millions of U.S. consumers and people in countries around the world – soon arriving on Korean tables.
“The resumption of U.S. beef exports to Korea is further evidence of our growing trade relationship with Korea, and the Administration will continue to work hard to obtain Congressional approval of the United States-Korea FTA this year.”

Background:

The June 13-19 discussions in Washington, led by Ambassador Schwab and Trade Minister Kim, focused on ways to facilitate the commercial, private-sector agreement between Korean importers and U.S. exporters to ship U.S. beef from animals less than 30-months for a transitional period until consumer confidence in South Korea improves. To support these voluntary commitments, the U.S. Department of Agriculture will establish, once the import protocol is in force, the “Less than 30 Month Age-Verification Quality System Assessment (QSA) Program for Korea” administered by the U.S. government under the Agricultural Marketing Act. This program will verify that all beef shipped to Korea under the program is from cattle less than 30 months of age.
In addition, both sides have agreed that certain products (brains, skulls, eyes and spinal cords), which are not specified risk materials in cattle less than 30 months of age, have not been traded between the two countries in the past. Once the import protocol is in effect, both sides will confirm their expectation that until there is market demand in Korea for such products, such commercial practice will continue.
The two governments will also clarify, once the import protocol is in effect, that Korea can take certain actions under the protocol if it finds serious non-compliance during its audits of U.S. beef processing plants, as well as actions it could take at the border upon detection of food safety hazards. All of these actions will be limited to the product or plant in question.
Finally, Korea confirmed that it will publish its import health requirements for U.S. beef and beef products, putting the April 18 protocol into effect shortly.
The April 18 protocol defines conditions for importation of U.S. beef to South Korea and provides for a full reopening of the market. It is fully consistent with OIE guidelines and will permit all U.S. beef and beef products from cattle of all ages to be exported to Korea, with appropriate Specified Risk Materials (SRMs), as defined by the OIE, removed, while guaranteeing commercial viability for U.S. industry. Both Korean importers and U.S. exporters reaffirmed the safety of all U.S. beef, regardless of age, in their statement and letter on June 20.

A comment from a reader of this blog

Terry S. Singeltary Sr. left this comment:

well, so the U.S. slams the mad cow door on Korea and it’s people, due to the bungled beef deal the USDA shoved down Lee’s throat. sadly, Lee signed the deal oblivious to what really has been going on behind closed doors for years here in the USA, and the USDA et al knew they had a fish on the line. my God, this guy was totally ignorant of what they were doing. now the kind honorable people of Korea will be force fed USDA certified beef. beef that has been highly suspect of mad cow disease since the USDA shut down testing, this after finding two cases of the atypical BSE in Alabama and Texas. remember, atypical BSE is more virulent than the UK BSE strain. Also, it seems the O.I.E. has sealed the deal on trading all strains of TSE i.e. mad cow disease strains globally, all for a buck, commodities and futures, to hell with human health. it’s business as usual folks, eat up, and die old and demented, if your lucky. I must apologize to the kind honorable citizens of Korea for what my Government has done. I tried. But as the USDA certified beef starts to flood Korean markets, remember one thing Korea, you don’t have to buy it. let it rot, until the USDA et al gets there head out of their pockets, and start to test all food producing cattle and all livestock for BSE and all TSE. CJD is a slow death while incubating. so you will not see the body bags all at once. as in the past here, it will be labeled as dementia, misdiagnosed as Alzheimer’s and other dementia ailments. it will become an acceptable death as here in the USA due to the push by the industries and your Government due to the financial aspect of it. The OIE and my Government sold their souls to the devil, and if you don’t believe me, just read the history. let it all be sporadic and or spontaneous they say, and make them eat it, and like it. that’s their motto. to hell with the consumer. Every American and Korean consumer should be demanding 100% BSE/TSE mad cow testing on all livestock food producing animals, for humans and animals. This should be a no-brainer, but instead, it’s a brain eater.

Terry thinks that Koreans shouldn’t buy U.S. beef and then they’ll all be fine. I wish the problem was as simple and convenient as that. The reason that the U.S. beef issue has caused such an uproar among Koreans is that some groups of people including school children will inevitably be exposed to the risks of eating U.S. beef unbeknown to them. The private companies that run school lunch programs and some low-end restaurant owners will use U.S. beef so as to increase profit margins at the expense of the health of their customers. And as we noted earlier, the South Korean government doesn’t have enough resources to make sure that American beef will not be sold as domestic beef or hanwoo.

“Stop the madness”

In his op-ed contribution to NY Times, Michael Hansen, a senior scientist at Consumers Union, writes about the so-called “rapid test” for mad cow disease that “Between 2001 and 2006, the European Union used the test to turn up 1,117 cases of mad cow disease in seemingly healthy cattle approved for slaughter.”

June 20, 2008
Op-Ed Contributor
Stop the Madness
By MICHAEL HANSEN

THE Korean beef market, once the third-largest importer of American beef, has shut its doors to the United States. Why? Because Koreans are worried about eating meat tainted with mad cow disease, which can be fatal to humans. Recent attempts by Korea’s president, Lee Myung-bak, to reopen the market have brought tens of thousands of demonstrators to the streets in protest.

American beef producers could easily allay those fears by subjecting every cow at slaughter to the so-called rapid test, which costs about $20 per carcass and screens for this brain-wasting disease in a few hours rather than days. But the United States Department of Agriculture won’t allow that.

In 2004, Creekstone Farms in Arkansas City, Kan., wanted to test the cattle it slaughters to comply with the wishes of its Korean and Japanese customers. But the department ruled that the rapid test could only be used as part of its own mad cow surveillance program, which randomly checks about 1 in 1,000 dead and slaughtered cattle in the United States every year. The sale of the kits to private companies is prohibited under an obscure 1913 law that allows the department to prohibit veterinary products that it considers “worthless.”

Creekstone sued the government in 2006, arguing in court that the Agriculture Department could not deem worthless a test that it used in its own surveillance program. The court agreed, but the department appealed. A decision is expected soon.

It is hard to understand why the Agriculture Department wants to stand in the way. Yes, the test has limitations: it can miss a case of mad cow disease, also called bovine spongiform encephalopathy, in the very early stages of incubation. But it can catch the disease in later stages, before animals show symptoms. Between 2001 and 2006, the European Union used the test to turn up 1,117 cases of mad cow disease in seemingly healthy cattle approved for slaughter.

Ideally, the Agriculture Department would follow the rules set up in Europe and Japan that require every cow over a certain age to be tested before being slaughtered. At the very least the department should not prevent private companies from testing.

Companies that use the rapid test should also be allowed to label their meat as having been “tested for mad cow” for American consumers who would like this extra level of protection. A Consumers Union national survey done in January 2004 found that 71 percent of adults who eat beef would pay more to support testing, and of those, 95 percent were willing to spend 10 cents more per pound for tested meat.

In the Creekstone case, the Agriculture Department argued that the tests should be prohibited because if one company started using them, consumer demand would drive all companies to use them, and that would add to the price of beef. But would that be such a bad thing? Isn’t this how the laws of supply and demand are supposed to work?

Most Americans, like Koreans, understand that testing for mad cow could save lives — and they’d like to have that option.

Michael Hansen is a senior scientist at Consumers Union.

“USDA mad cow madness”

LA Times editorial points out the absurdity, or madness, of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s efforts to block Creekstone Farms, a Kansas beef producer, from testing the carcasses of all its cattle for mad cow disease:

USDA mad cow madness
The agency’s refusal to let firms test for the disease denies consumers a safety net.
June 19, 2008

When is a worthwhile test for mad cow disease not worthwhile? According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, it’s when a private company uses the test.

At least, that’s part of the argument the USDA has been using to keep a beef producer from screening the carcasses of all its cattle, saying that although the federal agency relies on the rapid-screen test for high-risk cattle, the test would be “worthless” in the hands of Creekstone Farms.

Knowing that customers, especially foreign ones such as Japan and South Korea, remain wary of the USDA’s spotty screening program, the Kansas meat company has been fighting the agency for four years for the right to use the state-of-the-art testing lab it built. The rapid-screen test is not completely accurate, but it has been useful enough for the USDA to employ. Creekstone still would not be able to legitimately label its products as free of bovine spongiform encephalopathy, the technical term for mad cow disease, but its customers should have the choice of deciding whether the extra screening is worth paying for.

The USDA contends that private testing is unnecessary and that its own program, which tests fewer than 1% of cattle, adequately protects the public from mad cow. This might well be true. There is no known instance of U.S. beef causing a case of the human variant of the disease. But as long as the test presents no threat to animal or human health, why shouldn’t an innovative company give customers what they want? The USDA’s motivation probably has more to do with the beef industry’s opposition to Creekstone: Testing might put consumer pressure on other companies to do the same.

Creekstone won its first battle in court, but the USDA appealed; a ruling is expected soon. Meanwhile, instead of letting farms like Creekstone grow their businesses, the United States has been trying to persuade or strong-arm foreign countries into accepting U.S. beef standards, with limited success. Its recent deal with South Korean President Lee Myung-bak led to massive street protests. And while our bullying beef diplomacy reaps enmity instead of customers, Australia is increasing its market share.

The USDA has had enough problems in recent years making sure that companies meet its safety requirements. It ought to get that job done, and not interfere with producers that are going above and beyond to provide the safety standards some consumers want.

Top South Korean trade envoy fails to deliver his promises.

Quoting the officials close to the recent week-long talks between Kim Jong-hoon, the top South Korean trade envoy, and Susan Schwab, the United States trade representative, Steven Weisman of New York Times reports that both sides agreed on “a voluntary arrangement by private exporters and importers not to ship American beef from cattle more than 30 months old for consumption in South Korea.”

If true, that would mean a complete failure of the South Korean trade envoy’s promised efforts to make the U.S. government guarantee (at least for a limited period of time) that the beef exported to South Korea is from cattle younger than 30 months.

I guess Kim Jong-hoon will receive a warm welcome at the Inchon airport from candlelight-holding protesters.

“Broadband democracy”

As noted earlier, a unique aspect of the current candlelight vigils and rallies in Korea is the ubiquitous presence of guerrilla reporters who broadcast the events live through the internet.

Nathalie Touret of France 24, France’s 24 hour news network, reports that a new form of democracy has emerged in South Korea, and calls it “broadband democracy”:

Wednesday 18 June 2008

By Nathalie Touret / FRANCE 24

Almost every evening for the past month, thousands of people have been gathering at Seoul City Hall square. They don’t like the new President’s policy and they want to show it. And in these gatherings, laptops are a must have. Some people carrying computers film the crowd with their webcam and broadcast live videos thanks to high-speed wifi connections. “People who live in Seoul can go on the streets”, one of them says, “and some of those who do not live in the capital-city can come all the way here. But people who cannot, can at least see what is happening here live, through the internet.”

This is called broadband democracy and these Koreans are Netizens, Internet Citizens. They first voiced their discontent in cyberspace before taking to the streets. One man, sitting on the floor in front of his laptop is writing a live transcript of what is being said on the stage for a website. “What I want to do is inform people through the internet”, explains Chai Kun-shik, “provide them with detailed information on the situation and tell them the facts the governement is hiding”.

Sung-dae, a college student, collaborates with the same website. When he can’t attend a demonstration, he follows it live on the Internet. He says being a Netizen is very easy in Korea. The country ranks first among OECD nations in terms of household access to the internet. “We have wireless Internet everywhere and as long as you have a laptop, you can access Internet very easily”, he tells France 24. “Even out of Seoul, in the countryside, it is the same”.

Ohmynews has become an institution. This web paper was created in 2000 to rival the largely conservative newspapers that rarely questionned the authorities. During the 2002 presidential election campain, Ohmynews played a major role in insuring that a progressive candidate came into power. But not in 2007, when stricter laws were implemented. “In 2007, we didn’t have the right to give our opinion on public forums or websites, only on private blogs”, says editor in chief Lee Han-ki. “It was officially forbidden to voice support for one candidate. People who wrote such articles were arrested by the police and this stopped people from voicing their opinions on the Internet”.

It was only after the election, that Netizens were able to talk freely again on the Web. What is clear is that the Internet has become a real counter-power in South-korea, which is why new laws, aimed at controlling Internet content, are expected to be implemented in a couple of months.

Grade schoolers look forward to joining rallies.

South Korea is known for its long history of civil disobedience and rallies against authoritarian rulers. But something unprecedented is happening in this new chapter of South Korean struggles for democracy and human rights.

As mentioned earlier, it was teenage girls holding candlelights who ignited the on-going massive, daily protests against Lee Myung-bak and his policies. Then men and women in their 30’s and 40’s joined, and lastly came the college students in the 20’s.

Even more remarkable than that is the fact that a substantial number of protesters are grade schoolers. It’s not uncommon for parents to attend rallies these because that’s what their grade school children want. It’s no wonder then that these “young” protesters are looking forward to the upcoming summer break:

“You’ve gotta be ready for us. Break is coming soon.”

“It’s break soon. Grade schoolers, come together!”

Amen to that!

A sea of flags on top of police barricade.

As reported earlier, Lee Myung-bak, nicknamed “Bulldozer”, built container box barricades on several roads leading to the presidential Blue House in anticipation of record crowd at the anti-government rally on June 10.

According to one estimate, as many as 500,000 protesters gathered around downtown Seoul, and many of them pulled off yet another all-night rally, which culminated in the June 11 early morning’s spectacular performance of waving flags of various participating organizations on top of the police’s container box barricade, as shown below:

Also the protesters set up a placard with the question, “Is this the MB style of communation?”:

The sad thing is, we’re still nowhere near the end. On the contrary, we have just begun a long fight against an authoritarian president who is unwilling to listen to the people’s voices. Yet we will win this fight if we are patient enough and persistent enough to keep at it.

Lee Myung-bak builds a wall against the people, literally.

It’s June 10 (Korean time), a day that commemorates the revolt of June 10, 1987 that led to the fall of the military dictatorship of General Chun Doo-hwan. It’s a shame that history is repeating itself: after twenty one years, again a million of Korean people—at least 500,000 in Seoul alone—are expected to pour out into the streets today to protest against Lee Myung-bak, who took office only in February.

Amid expectations that the turnout may even surpass a million, Lee Myung-bak, the former CEO of Hyundai Engineering & Construction, is building new barricades made up of container boxes in order to block protesters’ expected attempts to march to the presidential Blue House:

The previous barricades made up of police buses were highly effective, although protesters were able to pull some buses out of the barricades using ropes. Lee Myung-bak and his police seem to have concluded that bus barricades wouldn’t be effective against a million protesters. Indeed, they apparently think that container boxes alone wouldn’t be enough. The container boxes are being stuffed with huge sand bags:

What a joke. Lee couldn’t have come up with a better idea for promoting the already widespread belief among Koreans that he has built a wall against them. The figurative truth is now no longer figurative.

A deal is brewing between U.S. and Korea?

Sisa IN, a respected economic and political weekly in Korea, has posted on its web site a blog article by one of its reporters, Nam Moon-hee, where he argues that the U.S. military-industrial complex may force the U.S. beef and cattle industry to grant Korea an option not to import the beef from cows over the age of 30 months in order to secure a number of lucrative weapons export deals with Korea in phase with Bush’s planned visit to Seoul in July.

Downtown Seoul: A liberation zone or a dead end?

Today is the last day of a three day, 72 hour marathon rally that has been billed as “Carnival of Protest”. The Carnival wasn’t a misnomer: it brought hundreds of thousands of people—many of them families with small kids—to downtown Seoul on each of Friday and Saturday. There were a variety of performances people could participate in or simply enjoy watching, and also foods and an ample amount of liquid refreshment were supplied by various individuals and groups sympathetic to the rally. It seemed that downtown Seoul turned into a massive liberation zone for people, who looked and acted like winners.

However, on the other hand, there are those who express frustrations over the humbling fact that the protesters haven’t been able to march toward the Blue House, the presidential residence, effectively blocked by thick barricades made up of police buses. It seemed that protesters were going nowhere, literally and figuratively. Downtown Seoul was a dead end for serious anti-Lee protesters.

It’s time to sit back and take stock of the situation.

WSJ apparently confirms what McDonald’s has officially denied.

In an article published today, Wall Street Journal’s South Korea correspondent Evan Ramstad makes two immensely interesting statements:

1) After noting that South Korean “Protesters and opposition politicians are pushing for a formal renegotiation that would lead to explicit exclusion of the sale of meat from cattle 30 months and older”, Ramstad states that “About 20% of the beef that Americans consume annually comes from cattle over that age, chiefly in the form of hamburger.” While he didn’t name any names, his statement clearly suggests that U.S. fast food companies such as McDonald’s are using the beef from cows over the age of 30 months to make hamburger patties. Otherwise that much of the beef consumed in the U.S.—about 20%!—can’t come from cows over that age. This is a new twist in the saga of the U.S. beef debate in Korea. As we reported earlier, McDonald’s U.S.A. has announced through McDonald’s Korea that “hamburger patties sold in the U.S. are made following Mcdonald’s global standards from the beef from American cows younger than 30 months”. A looming showdown between WSJ and McDonald’s?

2) Ramstad also states, to my shock, that “Less than 3% of the beef that the U.S. sold to South Korea in 2003 came from cattle 30 months or older.” If this is true, then the previous Roh Moo-hyun government imported American beef from cows over the age of 30 months, if not in large quantities. The 3% of the beef must have been consumed in the form of hamburger. Yuck.

Here’s the complete report by Ramstad (all bold emphases mine):

Korea’s Beef With the U.S.: A Trade Backlash Simmers Amid Food-Safety Concern

By EVAN RAMSTAD
June 6, 2008; Page A11

SEOUL, South Korea — The U.S. and South Korea have a complicated friendship that is burdened by history and by beef. Five weeks ago, South Koreans started to protest against the restart of U.S. beef imports, and those protests have evolved into a political crisis between two allies who have a love-hate relationship that is sometimes acted out with histrionics on the country’s streets.
[Lee Myung-bak]

South Koreans’ sentiment toward the U.S. is rooted in history that goes back to before the 1950-1953 Korean War, which many Americans tend to view as the crucial moment in the relationship between the two countries. At a young age, South Koreans learn not only about the role of the U.S. in the Korean War but also that a U.S. decision in the 1890s paved the way for Japan to eventually invade and occupy the Korean Peninsula.

As a result, many South Koreans were ready to believe the worst when a TV news program on April 29 reported that mad-cow disease may still be present in the U.S. and that American consumers were avoiding the meat for health concerns.

While Washington is Seoul’s closest military ally and a lead trading partner, South Koreans chafe at the appearance of being under America’s thumb. And to many of them, the new president, Lee Myung-bak, appears to have exhibited weakness by making a less-restrictive beef-import deal than neighbors Taiwan and Japan did with the U.S.

The controversy erupted over food-safety concerns following Mr. Lee’s agreement in mid-April to reopen the nation to full imports of U.S. beef. Imports had stopped after a case of mad-cow disease was discovered in the U.S. in 2003.

Eager to appease the public, Seoul is now seeking to change the deal’s terms without asking the U.S. formally for new talks, which would present a diplomatic embarrassment to both countries.

During the past few days, protesters and South Korean government officials alike have raised the specter that, unless the deal is amended, the backlash could turn into an anti-American movement.

“If the current situation keeps going, regardless of the original reason, it could affect Korea-U.S. relations,” Kang Jae-sup, chairman of the ruling Grand National Party, told the U.S. ambassador to South Korea on Thursday.

Meanwhile, opposition parties boycotted the opening of the new session of South Korea’s National Assembly over the deal. And activists announced they will try to spur one million people to demonstrate against the deal in Seoul next Tuesday, an anniversary of a major democracy protest in 1987.

If the beef-import deal unravels, it could damage the hopes of U.S. beef producers to regain access to what was once their third-largest export market, accounting for $800 million in sales in 2003 before an incident of mad-cow disease in Washington state led many countries to stop buying U.S. beef.

An unraveling also could reduce the chances for U.S. congressional approval of a broader free-trade agreement that South Korea and the U.S. forged last year. South Korea’s previous president agreed to reopen the country to imports of U.S. beef in return for the U.S.’s leaving South Korea’s rice industry out of the free-trade pact. Several American farm-state lawmakers have said they want South Korea to hold up its end of the bargain before they will consider ratifying the pact.

But the South Korean activist groups that are organizing the beef-deal protests also oppose the pact because they believe more imports from the U.S. will hurt Korean farmers. “The farm industry is not ready for trade protections to be taken away,” says Jang Dae-hyun, spokesman for one of the groups, Solidarity for Progress Korea.

Just after the U.S. and South Korea made the deal on April 18, politicians from the United Democratic Party, who led South Korea for a decade but recently lost control to Mr. Lee and the GNP, criticized Mr. Lee for being outmaneuvered by U.S. trade negotiators. “The political left had been waiting for an opportunity to damage the new government after losing the elections, and they took advantage of it,” says Jhe Seong-ho, a law professor at Chung-Ang University in Seoul.

Mr. Lee viewed the beef deal as a way to push the trade deal closer to realization and boost the economy, a central campaign promise. He may have misjudged the strong potential reaction back home.

On May 2, thousands of South Koreans gathered in downtown Seoul to protest. Activist groups distributed candles, re-creating the image of the anti-U.S. protests that occurred in 2003 when people became angry at the outcome of a trial of American soldiers involved in a vehicle accident that killed two South Korean girls. South Koreans felt disappointed that the soldiers were acquitted. Those protests helped elect President Roh Moo-hyun, who said in his campaign that South Korea should stand up to the U.S.

On May 3, a newspaper photo showed a girl holding a candle and a sign saying she didn’t want to die from American beef. A cartoon “candlelight girl” has since come to symbolize the beef-deal backlash. The protests have continued almost every night since.

As the initial health-concern fears subside, discussion is turning to the potential dangers of meat from older cattle that are more susceptible to mad-cow disease. Protesters and opposition politicians are pushing for a formal renegotiation that would lead to explicit exclusion of the sale of meat from cattle 30 months and older, similar to what Taiwan and Japan did with their U.S. beef-import deals.

About 20% of the beef that Americans consume annually comes from cattle over that age, chiefly in the form of hamburger. The U.S. exports younger, more profitable meat overseas. Less than 3% of the beef that the U.S. sold to South Korea in 2003 came from cattle 30 months or older.

Earlier this week, Alexander Vershbow, Washington’s ambassador in South Korea, got a taste of the simmering anti-U.S. sentiment when he emphasized the safety of American beef. “We hope that Koreans will begin to understand more about the science and about the facts of American beef,” he said.

The next day, politicians from several opposition parties took offense. One called the ambassador’s comments an “insult to all Korean citizens.” Mr. Vershbow expressed regret that he was misunderstood.

–SungHa Park contributed to this article.

Write to Evan Ramstad at evan.ramstad@wsj.com

Or the real culprit may be Daum itself.

Below is a confession of an employee of Daum, the host company of Agora, a liberal public discussion forum that serves as a command center for the on-going anti-government protests. It was posted about a month ago when Agora users started a hugely popular campaign for impeaching President Lee Myung-bak. But it’s getting new attention because of the incidence described in the previous post:

To users of Agora Free Discussion Room,

I am an employee of Daum. As a citizen of the Republic of Korea, I confess from my heart.

The Agora server lagging is intentionally caused by Daum, which is in emergency mode now and is controlling posts regarding impeaching President Lee Myung-bak.

I am a helpless, powerless employee, and I need to stop now in order not to get caught writing this.

Please do not be fooled by Daum’s tricks, and continue to make efforts.

As a citizen of the Republic of Korea, I feel it’s a shame that people can’t even make criticisms freely.

다음 아고라 토론방 여러분,

저는 Daum에 근무하고있는 사원입니다.

그에 앞서 대한민국의 국민으로써 양심적으로 고백합니다.

아고라의 서버 렉 현상은 다음의 의도적인 것으로써

지금 다음은 비상경계령을 내린상태로써 이명박대통령의

탄핵관련글들을 통제하고있는 상태입니다.

어쩔수없는 힘없는 직원이고 지금도 눈치봐가며 짧은시간동안

글을써야하기에 이렇게 마칩니다.

여러분 Duam의 눈속임에 속지말고 힘써주시기바랍니다.

저또한 대한민국의 국민으로써 참으로 지금 이 사태에대한

국민들이 비판조차 마음놓고할수없다는게 안타까울 따름입니다

No bottom to Lee Myung-bak’s approval ratings.

Today (June 3), the 100th day from Lee Myung-bak’s inauguration, two Korean broadcast media companies, KBS and YTN, released poll results showing that Lee’s approval ratings hit new bottoms: 17.2% (KBS) and 17.1% (YTN).

Pollsters agree that a president with approval ratings of below 30% is unable to govern effectively. A president with approval ratings of about 17% is nothing short of a vegetable.

We can only hope (against hope) that Lee will soon realize that the only way to regain the trust of the people is to renegotiate with the U.S. over beef import and to renounce the project of building the so-called “Great Canal for the Korean Peninsula” and also the plans for privatizing energy and utility industries and National Industry Bank.

Meanwhile, candlelights keep burning. Despite heavy rain, about 20,000 people participated today in peaceful rallies in downtown Seoul. Police violence subsided, and as a result, people could fully enjoy cheerful protest, shouting, singing and dancing on the streets.

“Crosswalk play”: New protest tactic emerges.

Civil disobedience in 2008 Korea has caught by surprise many conservatives and progressives alike who are used to conventional, organized protests led by some notable individuals and/or groups. Most of the current protesters—some political pundits have hailed them as “the 2008 generation“—do not belong to any civil organizations or political parties. This peculiar circumstance enabled protesters to be spontaneous and creative in many ways. Especially, they are constantly coming up with new ideas about how to protest peacefully AND cheerfully.

Perhaps the most successful and popular of them is the so-called crosswalk play. When the crosswalk signal changes to green, protesters holding candlelights on both sides of the street walk to the other sides while shouting slogans. This is not illegal according to the Korean Act of Assembly and Rallies. Participants invariably tell that unlike other forms of protests, it’s so fun. Yet it’s quite effective and makes bystanders join without being self-conscious.

Here’s a picture showing people having fun at play in the early morning of June 3 in local time:

The main rally on June 2 came to an end at around 11:30PM due to heavy rain. But many refused to leave and did crosswalk play till 6AM. My hats off to the men and women who are participating in daily all-night rallies.

Casualties mount as daily peaceful rallies are quelled with force.

Daily street rallies keep getting stronger, each time drawing more crowds. One striking thing is that the protesters are determined not to return violence for violence. Despite the riot police’s illegal uses of water cannons, billy clubs, and police shields, protesters are not swayed by emotions and remain clear-headed. Of course, there are those on the spot who feel the urge for revenge; but always people calm them down, shouting in unison “NO VIOLENCE! NO VIOLENCE!”.

Which means that casualties are mounting on the side of protesters. Here’s a picture showing a protester bleeding.