The Chaebol Returns To The Presidency 1967 [EN]: Chapter 145

145. Imports Allowed, Sales Prohibited

Eventually, experts held a debate for and against GMOs on a major broadcasting station program.

“While cigarettes are harmful, they are sold with warning labels, making it a personal choice. Prohibition is against fairness.”

America was truly a strange country.

President Jung thought that if it was proven that GMO crops were harmful, public opinion would explode, demanding a ban. However, the debate was evenly split, with some citing practicality and fairness.

Moreover, the stock price, which was expected to plummet, rose by 10% from the previous day.

President Jung, watching TV in his New York hotel, was taken aback.

“What! So, doing business means you can cover the damages with money and still make a profit?”

It felt like a ban was becoming less likely.

*

President Jung met with the plaintiff’s lawyer and asked about something he was curious about.

“I don’t know if you’re aware, but Monsanto is conducting a large-scale public opinion campaign. Is it effective?”

“I don’t know if you know, but Monsanto is lobbying media companies, the American Academy Association, and influential politicians.”

“Lobbying may be possible because it’s America, but even so, the harmfulness has been proven. Does guilty become innocent?”

“There can be a middle ground between guilty and innocent.”

“A middle ground? What kind of situation is that?”

“Because the harmfulness doesn’t directly attack cells but appears selectively through the filter of immunity, Monsanto is using a strategy to push it as a choice rather than a ban.”

“A choice? What does that mean?”

“They’re trying to remove responsibility by saying, ‘There are these side effects, so users should use it with caution,’ like any other herbicide.”

“This is harmful not only to those who spray pesticides but also to those who eat the crops, right?”

“They intend to apply it similarly not only to herbicide use but also to food. For example, ‘This is an allergenic food, so be careful!’”

“Ha~ Cunning bastards! Would they feed GMO food to their own children?”

“They wouldn’t choose it. Most modern pharmaceuticals and chemical products are highly toxic, but in America, they encourage consumers to choose according to their use rather than banning them. Gun ownership is permitted with the same intention. Guns themselves are neither murder nor defense; it’s a personal choice.”

“Guns….”

If President Jung were the president, he would have banned it immediately.

He couldn’t help but be bewildered by the sentiment different from Korea.

Indeed, even the dynamite invented by Nobel has two faces: war and construction. Isn’t it an invention that has been legalized because it’s America?

The atom, invented by the United States, has both atomic power and the atomic bomb that could destroy humanity.

American inventions are double-edged swords.

The fate of humanity depends on who uses them and how they are restrained from falling into the hands of evildoers.

No, perhaps this is the two faces of civilization: destruction and creation.

*

American hotel.

President Jung explained the situation in the United States in a phone call with the Korean president.

“…The harmfulness to the human body is currently under study. But even if the results show it is harmful, a ban seems difficult.”

The president, after hearing the explanation, was so dumbfounded that he spewed out harsh words.

– What a crazy situation! They’re hesitant to ban it even though it’s harmful?

“This is a country where even the use of guns that kill people is permitted. The idea is that individuals choose and take responsibility. Even though gun accidents never stop, it’s a country of free choice where you have to defend yourself because there are not only murderers.”

– That damn choice! It’s truly unbelievable! Well, they pointed guns at me when I tried to do oil business in the United States, so I’ve said everything [referring to a previous, frustrating experience].

“The crop farmers and grain dealers here also make huge political donations, so their influence is enormous.”

– Even if they’re powerful, the consumers’ votes are much more numerous, but they still do that?

“According to information, the Roundup side argues that exports account for 90% of their sales, so blocking exports would harm the national interest. There are quite a few politicians who think about the national interest.”

– My goodness! If it’s in the national interest for the people of other countries to die, how is that different from a war of aggression?

“That’s how it is.”

– You son of a bitches!

“We need to deal with this calmly, Your Excellency! When in Rome, do as the Romans do [a proverb meaning to adapt to the customs of the place you are in]. We can’t reverse the laws here.”

– Sigh~ I understand. I’m sorry I was so excited.

“I also managed to calm down only after cursing at the Statue of Liberty for several hours.”

– Hahaha, really? I should look at a picture or something to relieve stress. But really, how should we respond? I’m completely in the dark.

“Here, it’s ultimately a power struggle. Monsanto is maximizing its influence, and the victims and consumers must fight to the death. In the end, the only way is for consumers to become aware and judge by choice.”

– So, it’s not the law but a duel in the wilderness.

“That’s right. In dealing with this, there’s something I need to ask for your understanding, Your Excellency.”

– What is it that you need my understanding for?

“This Monsanto bet seems like it will have to endure a large deficit, not a profit, Your Excellency.”

Until now, it had been a win-win bet, shaking down China and Cargill to achieve political goals and also making a fortune.

But this time it was different.

President Jung told the president his plan.

The president nodded after listening.

– People are more important than money. I don’t mind spending money in such places. There’s enough money scraped from China, so the fund’s rate of return will be maintained. Don’t worry.

“Thank you for understanding. But no matter what, I will bring back all the seeds.”

– You’re suffering a lot alone in a foreign land. Is there anything I can do to help?

“Isn’t Korea one of the largest importers of American agricultural products? Please enlighten the public about the dangers of GMO agricultural products. Make them aware of the harmfulness so they can choose wisely.”

– No need for choice. We’ll do it the Korean way.

“…….”

– I’ll propose a related bill right away.

“As expected! I look forward to it, Your Excellency!”

Just in time, the World Health Organization (WHO) under the United Nations classified glyphosate [a widely used herbicide] as a Group 2A carcinogen and announced it.

*

National Assembly meeting room.

Prior to legislation, a public hearing was held, gathering representatives from academia, consumers, and the food industry.

A cooking oil company representative in a suit said.

“General soybeans are more than twice as expensive as GMO soybeans. If we don’t use GMO soybeans, the prices of cooking oil, soy sauce, and soybean paste will have to skyrocket by more than double. Products such as bread and feed made from GMO wheat and corn will also skyrocket, causing price instability.”

A consumer representative with a perm held sample breads in both hands and demanded.

“I’ll ask the food company presidents. Here, the bread on the right has ‘GMO with carcinogens’ attached, and the bread on the left has ‘NON-GMO’ attached. Which bread would you feed your children?”

“…….”

“Why can’t you answer!”

The consumer representative held up the bread and pressed the food industry representatives for an answer.

“Which one would you feed them? Answer, answer!”

“…….”

They were intimidated by the murderous consumer representative and couldn’t even make eye contact.

“You know it too. Would you put pesticide in your own mouth knowing it’s pesticide? You’ll put safe food in your mouth even if it’s expensive!”

“Hmm, hmm.”

“The current problem is that we can’t choose because there’s no GMO labeling on the products. If you’re not going to ban these harmful foods, shouldn’t consumers have the right to know? Why are you blocking that?”

“…….”

“Can’t you do business if it’s not GMO? You can use good ingredients and sell them expensively. The government will take care of the prices.”

“Well, if it’s expensive, please consider the food companies whose sales will decrease because they’ll eat only one bread instead of two.”

“Sales will decrease? Are you telling me to eat twice as much pesticide to save you guys now?”

The consumer representative glared as if to grab them by the collar.

But it wasn’t an issue that would end emotionally and unilaterally.

A professor of foreign affairs and trade said.

“There may be trade friction with the United States. Because the United States does not label GMOs, if trade decreases due to GMO labeling, they will represent the position of American farmers, saying it’s a ban.”

The consumer representative demanded.

“No, why is the United States standing idly by on GMOs? Is pesticide safe for Americans?”

“The genetically modified GMO itself is not harmful. The problem is the products treated with Roundup pesticide. Therefore, widespread GMO discrimination will trigger diplomatic issues.”

“…….”

The food industry also launched a counterattack because it was a matter of survival.

“Well, other countries don’t label GMOs. If only Korea labels them, it’s reverse discrimination. Domestic products will lose price competitiveness and all will wither.”

An academic representative said.

“The issue of reverse discrimination against domestic products seems to be a task that needs to be solved. Rather, cheap foreign GMO foods may occupy the Korean table.”

The consumer representative said.

“Why are you passing the homework on to others? Academics should come up with solutions, solutions! Isn’t that what academics do, research and solve things?”

“…….”

The biggest obstacles were the reverse discrimination of domestic food and trade friction issues.

It was the leader’s job to make a decision.

*

Presidential office.

The President told the National Assembly’s Legislation and Judiciary Committee members.

“To regulate while preventing reverse discrimination and trade friction, we must prohibit the sale of all agricultural, livestock, and food products containing harmful residual pesticides. The WHO has classified glyphosate as a carcinogen.”

“Your Excellency, are we excluding the word GMO?”

“There’s no need to specifically state ‘GMO agricultural products’ on food. If we set a list of prohibited residual pesticides under domestic law and prohibit domestic sales, imported products will be subject to the same laws in Korea, so imports will be possible but sales will not be allowed.”

“Ah, what a clever move! Then we can naturally block imports without diplomatic trade friction! You’re amazing, Your Excellency!”

“It’s not my idea, but I’m conveying the contents suggested by the Minister of Food and Drug Safety.”

*

For ten days, newspapers, TV news, and educational programs covered and criticized the harmfulness of GMO agricultural products.

The Ministry of Education sent harmfulness booklets to all educational institutions and issued guidelines to mandatorily educate for a certain amount of time.

Even the neighborhood kids, not knowing what it meant, muttered that GMOs were villains.

Meanwhile, in the National Assembly, a one-shot, three-hit bill that solved the consumer’s right to know, the food industry’s reverse discrimination, and diplomatic trade issues all at once passed the National Assembly unanimously.

The government established a food safety research institute and hired 18,000 researchers to inspect all domestic and foreign food items consumed in the country.

*

United States.

A piece of good news broke just before the second trial.

A researcher working at Monsanto’s in-house research institute exposed the harmfulness research data of Roundup to the media.

The exposed documents stated that Monsanto knew about the harmfulness and tried to hide it, and also recognized the results of the International Agency for Research on Cancer’s experiments in advance, and made various attempts to denigrate the research results by engaging in illegal transactions with scientists and government officials.