Where do all these comments on East Asia come from?

According to these analysts, U.S. foreign policy appears to have distanced this nation from the realities illuminated by Lattimore.  Like an enraged bull unable to shift its gaze from the illusion of threat to real causal forces, the current regime seems pathologically addicted to control strategies that no longer work, if they ever worked in the first place.  Chalmers Johnson, an ex-U.S. Naval officer and esteemed political scientist  described some of the most flagrant of these failures in his best selling 2000 book,  Blowback: the Costs and Consequences of American Empire. Concerning South Korea he wrote, "The rule of Syngman Rhee and the U.S.-backed generals was merely the first instance in East Aisa of the American sponsorship of dictators.  The list is long, but it deserves reiterations simply because many in the United States fail to remember (if they ever knew) what East Asians cannot help but regard as a major part of our postwar legacy."

Am I missing something here?--isn't South Korea prosperous, and I thought they were moving pretty strongly to a democratic regime.

Has the author missed the ongoing economic miracle in India and China--2.5 billion people coming out of poverty,,,,it's truly a miracle.  Bush's visit to India just highlighted what has been underway for years.  Does the author forget that 20 years ago India was viewed as firmly in the USSR's zone of influence?  Yes there are still problems in East Asia, particularly with North Korea and Iran.  But the overall trend has to be viewed as very positive.  I think, as we've discussed on the website and a number of others agree, that India and China are likely to be dominant economic powers in 2050--I for one say hurrah!  Prosperous people are normally peaceful people, unless they are attacked--and we certainly won't be attacking those two countries.  We're trying to build relationships with both and have been for 30+ years.  And of course I don't attribute these accomplishments to Bush,,,,this is American policy over the course of Democratic and Republican leadership.  But, IMHO, Bush is not negating that effort.