CINA

본문

A try to reply..#2

One of the most disputed points of the S.K.-US FTA is the negative effect for the S.K. agriculture, especially the issue of rice.

Already in autumn 2002, I had the possibility to join for the first time a peasants' rally in Seoul(about 200,000 of them demostrated in Seoul's Yeouido) I thought that especially the rice production in S.K. will have no future. On this rally, but also later when I had to pass the countryside, I saw only middle aged people. For what I know, their children/grandchildren are mainly refusing to follow the path of their parents/grandparents. Simply they have complete no interest to spend their life in the rice fields. They only want to move to the big cities, go to study and/or later "earn a lot of money"(^^).
But this development - if my reflection was/is right(eh~ I'm not sure..) - will lead to the death of the S.K. rice production. Sooner or later. Whether with or whithout S.K.-US FTA.

In my opinion there should be the demand (by the farmers, but also the supporting movements) that the gov't is helping (for example finacial) to create alternatives on the countryside. Perhaps there are a lot of alternatives, beside the rice production, to make the life on the countryside attractive even for younger people. Organic agriculture - payable also for the "ordinary" people, kinds of eco-tourism... Anyway.. whatever..