raises

Feb. 11 (Asia Today) — South Korea’s National Police Agency is moving to dismantle a metropolitan-level intelligence structure created under the previous administration and restore intelligence units at local police stations, prompting renewed concerns about broad surveillance of civilians and “dragnet” information gathering.

Critics said the plan clashes with the broader push to reform powerful state institutions, particularly after South Korea abolished the National Intelligence Service’s domestic intelligence functions. Civic groups urged stronger outside oversight and called for curbs on police intelligence work.

Concerns intensified after the police agency said Monday it plans to replace the bottom 15% of officers in performance evaluations for intelligence police. Some officers said the policy could encourage quantity-driven reporting rather than careful, limited collection.

“If the volume of intelligence becomes the basis for evaluation, there will be pressure to put even wide-ranging trends into reports,” an intelligence officer said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Police station intelligence units have historically tracked local “trends” across political and social fields, with some critics alleging they expanded monitoring to civic groups and individuals. Past controversies over civilian surveillance helped drive efforts to reduce the size and role of intelligence police, with many station-level units later disbanded or scaled back and reorganized into a metropolitan system.

The National Police Agency has argued that strengthening foreign affairs and intelligence functions is needed to combat transnational crime, citing incidents such as the “Cambodia case” last year. Late last year, the National Police Commission approved a plan to revert metropolitan intelligence teams back to police station intelligence units.

Officers said the change could also strengthen the influence of station chiefs, who under the metropolitan system did not directly oversee intelligence officers assigned to provincial police agencies. With station-level units returning, officers said some chiefs could effectively regain their own internal intelligence teams.

The Police Reform Network, a coalition that includes the People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy, said in a statement Tuesday that authorities must clearly explain how standards, reporting and management systems would change if station-level intelligence units are restored.

A National Police Agency official said safeguards are already in place following a 2021 reform, including rules defining the scope of intelligence activities under presidential decree and potential criminal penalties for violating political neutrality obligations.

The official said compliance officers conduct routine inspections and training and described the performance-based personnel pool as a measure aimed at screening out individuals deemed problematic in the past.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260211010004272

CLEVELAND — Luka Doncic grabbed at his left leg. He immediately thought of Dru Smith. The Miami Heat guard’s knee injury suffered in 2023 when he slipped off the side of the Cleveland Cavaliers court haunted Doncic while he winced in pain near the Lakers bench.

The Lakers superstar avoided serious injury after falling off the side of the Cavaliers’ raised court on Monday, but the threat of a player being hurt by Cleveland’s unique 10-inch drop off between the court and the arena floor came into focus again during the Lakers’ 129-99 loss to the Cavaliers.

“It is absolutely a safety hazard,” Lakers coach JJ Redick said after Doncic was able to return later in the first quarter. “And I don’t know why it’s still like that. I don’t. You know, you can lodge formal complaints. A lot of times you don’t see any change when you lodge a formal complaint.”

Doncic was injured shooting a fadeaway three with 7:58 left in the first quarter. He was hopping on one foot after releasing the shot and hopped right off the platform, grabbing immediately for his left leg. When he hobbled to the locker room, Doncic could barely put any weight on his leg.

But he returned with 1:32 remaining in the first quarter and finished with 29 points, six assists and five rebounds. He didn’t have any additional braces or wraps on his left leg, but he said he didn’t feel quite 100%.

“I kind of got scared,” Doncic said. “It wasn’t a great feeling and looking back at the video I think I got a little bit lucky. It hurts obviously more now, but, just, I tried to go.”

Smith was injured much more severely in 2023 when he was closing out on defense, landed on a stat sheet and slipped over the edge. He suffered a season-ending anterior cruciate ligament sprain in the accident, and the Heat contacted the NBA to express concerns about the floor at the time.

“It’s tough to see another player get hurt on this court, with the fall, with the drop off,” Lakers guard Gabe Vincent said Monday, “so hopefully something can get fixed with that, but we’re fortunate that [Doncic] is OK.”

Cleveland’s Rocket Arena, which opened in 1994 and was last renovated in 2019, is also home to the Cleveland Monsters, an American Hockey League affiliate of the Columbus Blue Jackets. The basketball court is raised to accommodate the ice underneath the floor. But several teams in the NBA, including the Lakers, share their arena with hockey teams and none have a court that drops off like Cleveland’s.

“It’s the only court like this so, I guess it’s my fault,” Doncic said. “I [gotta] stop jumping like that.”

The Lakers have history with concerning courts this year. In November, Doncic said during a postgame news conference that the Lakers’ custom NBA Cup court used during a home game against the Clippers was dangerously slippery. The team flagged the problem to the league and the Lakers did not use the court again because it was not deemed safe for play in time for the other NBA Cup games.

But when asked if there was a way he could bring the latest problem up with the league, Doncic demurred.

“I don’t know,” Doncic said, “don’t involve me in that.”

Similarly, Redick said any changes would be “way above my pay grade.”

US President Donald Trump has announced he is raising tariffs on South Korean imports to 25% after accusing Seoul of “not living up” to a trade deal reached last year.

In a post on social media, Trump said he would increase levies on South Korea from 15% across a range of products including automobiles, lumber, pharmaceuticals and “all other Reciprocal TARIFFS”.

Trump said South Korean lawmakers have been slow to approve the deal while “we have acted swiftly to reduce our TARIFFS in line with the Transaction agreed to”.

South Korea says it had not been given official notice of the decision to raise tariffs on some of its goods, and wanted urgent talks with Washington over the issue.

It added that South Korea’s Industry Minister Kim Jung-kwan, who is currently in Canada, will visit Washington as soon as possible to meet US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick.

South Korea’s benchmark Kospi stock index fell on Tuesday morning but was trading about 1.8% higher later in the day as shares in major exporters recovered.

Seoul and Washington reached a deal last October, which included a pledge from South Korea to invest $350bn (£256bn) in the US, some of which would go to shipbuilding.

The following month, the two countries agreed that the US would reduce tariffs on some products once South Korea started the process to approve the deal.

The agreement was submitted to South Korea’s National Assembly on 26 November and is currently being reviewed. It is likely to be passed in February, according to local media.

Tariffs are paid by companies who import products. In this case, US firms will pay a 25% tax on goods they buy from South Korea.

Trump has frequently used tariffs as leverage to enact foreign policy during his second term in the White House.

On Saturday, he threatened Canada with a 100% tariff if it struck a trade deal with China.

On Monday, Chinese officials said its “strategic partnership” agreement with Canada is not meant to undercut other countries.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has said his country was not pursuing a free trade deal with China and has “never” considered it.

He added that Canadian officials have made their position clear to their American counterparts.

Before that, Trump said he would impose import taxes on eight countries – including the UK – who opposed US plans to seize Greenland, an autonomous territory in the Kingdom of Denmark which is a member of Nato.

He later backed down from the tariff threat over Greenland citing progress towards a “future deal” over the island, but the episode strained US relations with Denmark and other Nato allies.

WASHINGTON — The crisis touched off by President Trump’s demand to take ownership of Greenland appears over, at least for now. But the United States and its European allies still face a larger long-term challenge: Can their shaky marriage be saved?

At 75 years old, NATO has survived storms before, from squabbles over trade to estrangement over wars in Vietnam and Iraq. France, jealous of its independence, even pulled its armed forces out of NATO for 43 years.

But diplomats and foreign policy scholars warn that the current division in the alliance may be worse, because Trump’s threats on Greenland convinced many Europeans that the United States has become an unreliable and perhaps even dangerous ally.

The roots of the crisis lie in the president’s frequently expressed disdain for alliances in general and NATO in particular.

Long before Trump arrived in the White House, presidents from both parties complained that many NATO countries weren’t pulling their weight in military spending.

But earlier presidents still considered the alliance an essential asset to U.S. foreign policy and the cornerstone of a system that prevented war in Europe for most of a century.

Trump has never seemed to share that view. Even after he succeeded in persuading NATO members to increase their defense spending, he continued to deride most allies as freeloaders.

Until last year, he refused to reaffirm the U.S. commitment to help defend other NATO countries, the core principle of the alliance. And he reserved the right to walk away from any agreement, military or commercial, whenever it suited his purpose.

In the two-week standoff over Greenland, he threatened to seize the island from NATO member Denmark by force, an action that would have violated the NATO treaty.

When Britain, Germany and other countries sent troops to Greenland, he threatened to hit them with new tariffs, which would have violated a trade deal Trump made only last year.

Both threats touched off fury in Europe, where governments had spent most of the past year making concessions to Trump on both military spending and tariffs. When Trump backed down, the lesson some leaders drew was that pushing back worked better than playing nice.

“We do prefer respect to bullies,” French President Emmanuel Macron said.

“Being a happy vassal is one thing. Being a miserable slave is something else,” Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever said.

The long-term danger for the United States, scholars said, is that Europeans might choose to look elsewhere for military and economic partners.

“They just don’t trust us,” said Richard N. Haass, a former top State Department official in the George W. Bush administration.

“A post-American world is fast emerging, one brought about in large part by the United States taking the lead in dismantling the international order that this country built,” he wrote last week.

Some European leaders, including Macron, have argued that they need to disentangle from the United States, build military forces that can defend against Russia, and seek more reliable trade partners, potentially including India and China.

But decoupling from the United States would not be easy, fast or cheap. Europe and Canada still depend on the United States for many of their defense needs and as a major market for exports.

Almost all NATO countries have pledged to increase defense spending to 5% of gross domestic product, but they aren’t scheduled to reach that goal until 2035.

Meanwhile, they face the current danger of an expansionist Russia on their eastern frontier.

Not surprisingly for a group of 30 countries, Europe’s NATO members aren’t united on the question. Macron has argued for more autonomy, but others have called for caution.

“Despite all the frustration and anger of recent months, let us not be too quick to write off the transatlantic partnership,” German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said at Davos.

“I think we are actually in the process of creating a stronger NATO,” said Finnish President Alexander Stubb. “As long as we keep doing that, slowly and surely we’ll be just fine.”

They argue, in effect, that the best strategy is to muddle through — which is what NATO and Europe have done in most earlier crises.

The strongest argument for that course may be the uncertainty and disorder that would follow a rapid erosion — or worse, dissolution — of an alliance that has helped keep its members safe for most of a century.

The costs of that outcome, historian Robert Kagan warned recently, would be borne by Americans as well as Europeans.

If the United States continues to weaken its commitments to NATO and other alliances, he wrote in the Atlantic, “The U.S. will have no reliable friends or allies, and will have to depend entirely on its own strength to survive and prosper. This will require more military spending, not less. … If Americans thought defending the liberal world order was too expensive, wait until they start paying for what comes next.”