Jeju Naval Base controversy

The plan was first announced in 1993 during the Kim Young Sam presidency.[6] During the Roh Moo-hyun presidency, the southwestern villages of Hwasun and Wimi were considered potential sites of construction.[7] In 2007, Gangjeong village, located on the southern coast of Jeju Island, was designated as the official site.[8] Two days after former village chief Yoon Tae-Jun announced his approval for the naval base construction on April 24, 2007, a vote was held on April 26, 2007 during which only 87 of the over 1,000 eligible voters were present. Ignoring local voting protocol, the motion was passed based on clapping.[9]

The base was chosen for its strategic forward location that could provide rapid response to any type of activity in the neighboring seas shared with China and Japan, along with protecting the vital Korean shipping lanes through which 99% of Korean exports and all oil imports flow.[10] A 2012 editorial in The Dong-a Ilbo, made the case for the base in the context of maritime disputes with China over claims to the Socotra Rock, which South Korea claims lies within its exclusive economic zone: "... the planned naval base on Jeju Island is a must ... If disputes arise over Ieo [i.e. the Socotra Rock], the South Korean Navy should respond to them."[11] The editorial noted that naval response time to the Socotra Rock from the base in Busan is 23 hours versus eight hours from Jeju and went on to observe: "The naval base is also essential to protecting the Jeju sea route, where more than 90 percent of inbound and outbound maritime freight passes."[11] Jeju provincial council representative, Park Weon-cheol (박원철), discussed how the naval base can be potentially used as an aircraft carrier base.[12]

According to South Korean defense officials, the base is a multipurpose joint civilian-military project and will not allow permanent stationing of American or other foreign naval vessels.[5][13] In 2011, South Korea's then-deputy chief of naval operations, Rear Admiral Koo Ok-hyoe, indicated that the base "is meant to deter North Korea, not China" and will not host a US missile defense system.[13] In 2013, the South Korean government denied reports that it plans to participate in the US missile defense program but this does not include South Korean guided missile destroyers equipped with the US-made Aegis Combat System, which will be based in Jeju.[2][14][15][note 1]

The coastline surrounding Gangjeong Village consists of one contiguous volcanic rock. The estuary is Jeju Island’s only rocky wetland and acts as home to several endangered species and soft coral reefs. In 1991, the Jeju Provincial government designated the coastline surrounding Gangjeong Village an Absolute Conservation Area (ACA). In 2002, the area where the naval base construction is currently ongoing was designated a UNESCO Biosphere Conservation Area.[18] In December 2009, Jeju Island Governor Kim Tae-hwan nullified the ACA designation to proceed with the naval base construction. The Jeju Branch of the Korean Federation of Environmental Movements have criticized the Navy’s Environmental Impact Assessment noting that several endangered species are absent from the report.[19]

During its recent archeological excavation of the Gangjeong coastal area the Jeju Cultural Heritage Research Institute discovered artifacts dating back to 4-2 B.C.E. inside the naval base construction zone. According to the director of the Korean Cultural Heritage Policy Research Institute only 10 – 20% of the site has been excavated and the naval base construction violates cultural properties protection law.[20]

Rally near the U.S. Embassy in downtown Seoul against the planned Jeju-do Naval Base

A recent statement to the International Union for Conservation of Nature signed by a number of leading academics and well known figures including Vandana Shiva, Walden Bello, David Suzuki, Noam Chomsky, Gloria Steinem and Robert Redford cites police brutality and claims that over 500 people have been arrested thus far.[21] The protesters have staged rallies to stop the naval base construction despite these actions being ruled illegal by the Jeju courts.[22] Protestors include resident villagers, other Jeju Islanders, mainland activists, international peace activists, leading figures from various religious orders, women's rights and environmental organizations, and opposition politicians, among others.[23][24] International human rights organizations including Amnesty International have condemned indiscriminate arrests of protestors by the police and the alleged hiring of "thugs" by construction companies.[25][26][27][28]

Writing in The Diplomat in 2013, professor Andrew Yeo of Catholic University argued most South Koreans do not support the protesters, rejecting their cause as a case of either NIMBYism or "a politically motivated agenda driven by leftist activists and opposition party members."[29]

The "International Interfaith Solidarity" and Veterans For Peace expressed concerns about the naval base. They believe it will strengthen the military presence of U.S. in the region and escalate the tensions between U.S. and China.[51] In October 2011 and March 2012, two international environment activists, Angie Zelter and Benjamain Monnet, had been arrested and then deported from the country[52] when they illegally approached the construction site. The Asian Human Rights Commission criticized South Korean police for assaulting and detaining activists.[53] Julia Marton-Lefèvre, the Director General of the IUCN, stated that "...The Republic of Korea has the responsibility of keeping its country safe; it has equal obligations on the development of the society and economy and the protection of the environment..."[54]

• Republic of Korea Navy

• Save Jeju Now - lobby group