The Militant(logo) 
    Vol.61/No.5           February 3, 1997 
 
 
Korean Workers End General Strike, Vow To Keep Up  

BY BRIAN TAYLOR
Workers in south Korea ended a general strike after more than three weeks, but plan to continue weekly work stoppages on Wednesdays and mass rallies on Saturdays. Students are also continuing demonstrations. The protests began December 26 against antilabor legislation passed that day. The unionists say they will resume the general strike if the Seoul regime has not repealed the antilabor laws by mid- February.

Some 180,000 workers participated in the one-day action Wednesday, January 22. Demonstrations of 10,000 took place in downtown Seoul, the capital, and in the industrial city of Ulsan that day. The workers are fighting to reverse the laws, which restrict union rights, allow companies greater latitude to impose layoffs, and give additional powers to the secret police.

Students demonstrated in Seoul January 19, the day after the union officials announced their decision to call off the general strike, also demanding the repeal of the new legislation. They burned effigies of President Kim Young Sam and U.S president William Clinton. Hundreds of the youth faced off with riot police, who sprayed them with tear gas. The students fought back, reportedly hurling 200 firebombs, as well as rocks at the cops. According to the Associated Press, at least four students were arrested and several were injured.

A telephone survey of 1,444 adults published in WIN, a monthly news magazine, showed less than 17 percent support for Kim's party - a substantial drop from the already low 30 percent figure recorded before the strike. "Many people are angry at what they see as the cold-hearted manner in which the Government has brushed off the workers and the undemocratic way in which the law was enacted," stated a January 19 New York Times article. The poll also said 73 percent disagreed with the new law and the way it was passed - in a secret National Assembly meeting without opposition legislators present. This is also shown by the number of people who participated in actions that are not members of unions on strike, and the jeering of riot cops by bystanders.

Under growing pressure to resolve the conflict, president Kim gave a few concessions. Kim agreed on January 21 to have the parliament "reconsider" the new law, including opposition party members in the discussion this time. He also agreed to suspend arrest orders for 16 union leaders declared "fugitives" for leading an "illegal" strike.

The Kim regime has not backed off from its fundamental aim, however, which is to impose on workers the measures needed by the employing class in Korea and in the imperialist centers. Last October, John Pinkel, head of research at HG Asia Securities in Seoul, told the Financial Times, "Korea will have to go through a painful adjustment period...if it is to recover its competitiveness."

Andrew Pollack, a New York Times reporter in Seoul, wrote in his January 21 assessment of the strikes, "To the extent that they [executives] have made their position known, it has been to urge the Government to defend the new labor law." He said that even though more than $3.1 billion has been lost from the strikes, plus an additional $480 million in lost exports - figures that are greater than all other strikes combined in 1996 - "business executives say the new law will help their competitiveness and profits in the long run, even if they have to endure the short-term pain of a strike."

The Seoul regime is also under pressure from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), made up primarily of imperialist powers, which recently admitted south Korea into its ranks. Last year Seoul set up a presidential commission on industrial relations reforms, charged with making recommendations for the new labor law, as part of its bid for OECD membership. Shortly thereafter Kim abolished the commission due to "insurmountable differences" between labor and management representatives. Labor officials from the OECD are portrayed in the press as siding with the strikers in countless articles. Now there is talk of the possible censuring of the south Korean government by this body.

However, the Financial Times writes, "It is still unclear whether a strong majority of members opposes Korea's move" to impose the new labor laws. The article also notes that "labor standards are not normally an issue for OECD entry."

An article in the Christian Science Monitor offered an idea of the genuine concerns of the OECD. "Membership will require Seoul to adhere to the OECD's philosophy of free trade and economic openness." Providing the basis for capital to "move freely in and out" of south Korea is the goal.

Kim told the parliamentary opposition that antilabor measures will not be repealed, though opposition parties could try to revise the law. He also did not invite union leaders to the meeting. Earlier the government had challenged union officials to a debate, which they refused to participate in. According to the January 19 New York Times, Kwon Young Kil, head of the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions, later agreed to the debate. The government then backed out, saying it would not talk with someone wanted for arrest for leading an illegal strike.  
 
 
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home