July 27, 2013

American Forces Press Service: Obama Proclaims National Korean War Veterans Armistice Day

WASHINGTON, July 25, 2013 – President Barack Obama has issued a proclamation marking July 27th as National Korean War Veterans Armistice Day.   The following is the text of the President's proclamation:

Today, America pauses to observe the 60th anniversary of the end of the Korean War -- a conflict that defined a generation and decided the fate of a nation. We remember the troops who hit the beaches when Communist forces were pressing south; who pushed back, and fought their way north through hard mountains and bitter cold. We remember ordinary men and women who showed extraordinary courage through 3 long years of war, fighting far from home to defend a country they never knew and a people they never met.

Most of all, we remember those brave Americans who gave until they had nothing left to give. No monument will ever be worthy of their service, and no memorial will fully heal the ache of their sacrifice. But as a grateful Nation, we must honor them -- not just with words, but with deeds. We must uphold our sacred obligation to all who serve -- giving our troops the resources they need, keeping faith with our veterans and their families, and never giving up the search for our missing and our prisoners of war. Our fallen laid down their lives so we could live ours. It is our task to live up to the example they set, and make America a country worthy of their sacrifice.

This anniversary marks the end of a war. But it also commemorates the beginning of a long and prosperous peace. In six decades, the Republic of Korea has become one of the world's largest economies and one of America's closest allies. Together, we have built a partnership that remains a bedrock of stability throughout the Pacific. That legacy belongs to the service members who fought for freedom 60 years ago, and the men and women who preserve it today.

So as we mark this milestone, let us offer a special salute to our Korean War veterans. Let us renew the sacred trust we share with all who have served. And let us reaffirm that no matter what the future holds, America will always honor its promise to serve our veterans as well as they served us -- now and forever.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim July 27, 2013, as National Korean War Veterans Armistice Day. I call upon all Americans to observe this day with appropriate ceremonies and activities that honor our distinguished Korean War veterans.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twenty-fifth day of July, in the year of our Lord two thousand thirteen, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-eighth.

BARACK OBAMA
Categories:

Deutsche Welle: A Rare Glimpse into North Korea

By Benjamin Mack. This article originally appeared on Deutsche Welle on July 26, 2013.

Sixty years after the armistice that ended the Korean War, many changes have occurred in North Korea. But seeing them in this reclusive country, which has recently only just begun to promote tourism, is not easy.

"The North Hamgyong Provincial E-Library has 301 computers," translates Suh Byung Kim, the wiry 34-year-old guide, as the head librarian speaks Korean. "It is open every day at 10 a.m. Every person in the provincial capital Chongjin can use them," he says to a group of Westerners visiting the location.
However, the two-floor facility is already half-full - and it's only 9:00 a.m. "Many students come here before it opens," he explains. But Suh has no explanation as to why they're here on what is supposed to be a holiday.

There are many computers in the building. They are all Dell models, only a few years old, boasting features such as Microsoft Office while running on a Windows XP operating system. But most striking is one particular feature: a desktop icon indicating an Internet Explorer browser. Could it be Internet access in North Korea? "I am sorry, but trying now is not possible," Suh says. "We must go quickly so not to disturb the students."

The North Hamgyong Provincial E-Library is said to be among the largest libraries in North Korea
Tablets and smartphones

Proliferating technology is one sign things are changing in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea - North Korea's official name - since an armistice ended the large-scale fighting of the Korean War 60 years ago. Considered less technologically developed than South Korea, more North Koreans are buying mobile phones, which are connected to either a nationwide 3G network called Koryolink or 2G operator SunNet but typically unable to make international calls.

Smartphones such as Apple's iPhone can be purchased - as can their plethora of optional accessories. There's even a third-generation Android-based tablet available to North Korean consumers called "Samjiyon." The device comes installed with a version of the game "Angry Birds," a Korean-English dictionary, and features e-books praising the ruling Kim family and the government's communist system. It even has a web browser, but no Wi-Fi.

Proliferating technology is one sign things are changing in North Korea
But technological advancements have not changed the country's questionable human rights record, say experts. "I have seen no indication towards improving human rights in North Korea," says Greg Scarlatoiu, executive director of the US-based Committee for Human Rights in North Korea. "I am not optimistic."

Scarlatoiu is not alone with his assessment. "Kim Jong Un's succession as North Korea's supreme leader after the death of his father, Kim Jong-Il, in December 2011 had little impact on the country's dire human rights record," writes Human Rights Watch in its 2013 World Report. "Arbitrary arrest, detention, lack of due process, torture and ill-treatment of detainees remain serious and pervasive problems."

New developments, old problems

As is often the case, it is difficult to know with certainty how specifically the lives of ordinary North Koreans are changing. As Suh leads a small group through the city of Hoeryong - despite the distinction of this being the first group of Western tourists to visit the area - he and a pair of minders do their best to restrict photography.

"Please, no photos of people without asking first," he reminds everyone. Later, Suh and the minders have no problems allowing pictures of spotlessly clean homes and smiling citizens in a model village along the coast near Nojok-tong.

Such regulations may seem odd, but it's all part of the North's tourism policy, says Dr. Rajiv Narayan, a researcher with Amnesty International. "The reasoning is both financial and propaganda," says Narayan. "They only let you see what they want you to see. That will continue."

The revenues are adding up thanks to increasing visitor numbers. Around 4,000 Westerners visited North Korea in 2012, a new record that the state-run Korean Central News Agency said was due to "eye-catching achievements made by the country in the effort for building a thriving socialist nation in recent years."

Yet the increased tourism has been unable to mask another purported issue: food shortages. Narayan says the exact scope has been difficult to verify. "They have not been able to resolve the crisis and there is a health crisis as well, with access to basic health care difficult. Many of the health problems being reported are due to the food crisis."

A high standard of living?

In the Rason Special Economic Zone, established in the early 1990s to promote economic growth through foreign investment and based on China's economic model, young women in high heels and Western fashions casually stroll past while checking messages on their phones. In a small photo studio next to the offices of the Rason International Tourist Agency, those with money to spend can purchase new batteries and memory cards for their digital cameras or, for three Chinese renminbi, have a photographer snap pictures of them standing in front of what's supposed to be the Pyongyang skyline.

"As you can see," explains Kim Jaehyok, a 30-year-old guide with a steely expression, "Rason is a highly developed area. Citizens here enjoy a high standard of living."

Conditions in the nearby Rajin Shoe Factory are somewhat different. Here, about 120 workers in four shifts produce around 180,000 pairs of women's and men's shoes to be sold domestically per year.

"The workers are very busy and cannot be disturbed"
Revolutionary music glorifying the state blares from loudspeakers amid an acrid smell of hot glue. Surrounding the workers and their whirring machines are a myriad of propaganda posters inspiring them to work harder. Some are difficult to see from a distance due to the dim light.

"It's not very bright in here," someone remarks. "In another building the workers have more light," Kim replies. We ask if we may go there. "I am sorry," Kim says. "The workers are very busy and cannot be disturbed." He pauses. "Now that we've seen the shoe factory, we will go for ice cream."
Categories:

On the Occasion of the 60th Anniversary of the Pan Mun Jon Armistice

60 years ago to the day, on July 27th 1953, the Korean War came to an end. Kim Il Sung, – today’s North Korean leader’s grandfather – had started it three years before with the approval of Joseph Stalin and the support of all the communist parties of the world. Thanks to the opposition of the UN and the sacrifice of more than 50.000 American soldiers fighting under its command (approximately the same number of US troops died in Vietnam), not to mention all the fighters, Dutch, French, Turkish, British, Colombian, etc., who lost their lives in this conflict, the attempt by the “socialist camp” to capture the whole of the Korean peninsula was foiled. The lies and manipulations surrounding a so-called “bacteriological war” that the US was said to fight there, – and those lies were spread everywhere by all the communist parties of the world, French communist party included –, were unable to sway public opinion as they were able to years later during the Vietnam War, the arguments used then being somewhat different. And it’s only because thousands and thousands of Chinese soldiers fought alongside the North Korean Army that the North Korean régime set up by the Soviets north of the 38th parallel after the defeat of Japan in 1945 did not collapse.

After the armistice was signed in July 1953, – and there is still no peace treaty today –, China and the USSR went on helping a North Korean state which started building a totalitarian régime unparalleled in the rest of the world. And it is still thanks to the protection of Red China that the so-called “Democratic People’s Republic of Korea” can build the atom bomb, oppress its own people and ceaselessly threaten and provoke a South Korea which thanks to a capitalism that the North cannot stand has in sixty years become a free and prosperous country.

We call on all of you who want some 25 million North Koreans who are presently subjected to famines, an insane propaganda and the fear of being sent to a concentration camp, to denounce not only the protections and complicities from which the Pyongyang régime still benefits today, but also its horrendous crimes. We should also try and keep the North Koreans informed of what is going on in the outside world, especially in our western democracies.

It is part of our duty to let the North Koreans know that freedom lies outside their borders and that one day their horrendous régime will die in infamy.

Robert Pépin, Pierre Rigoulot, André Sénik and Guy Tissier 
for the French Committee to Help the Population of North Korea

Categories:

July 25, 2013

Trustpolitik vs. Distrustpolitik: Down and Out on the Korean Peninsula


By Robert M. Collins. This article was originally published on War on the Rocks on July 23, 2013.

Robert M. Collins served 31 years in various positions with the U.S. military in Korea. He is the author of Marked For Life: Songbun – North Korea’s Social Classification System, published by the Committee on Human Rights in North Korea, Washington, DC.

After decades of tensions and stalemate, Trustpolitik, a  fresh approach by South Korean President Park Geun-hye towards North Korea, indicates why it is so difficult to build anything resembling a stable relationship between these troubled neighbors. Through Trustpolitik, Park has sought to avoid the excesses and naïveté of Kim Dae-jung’s “Sunshine Policy” – which aimed to induce the Kim family’s Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) to the table through almost unconditional economic cooperation and aid.

But even President Park’s approach imagines too much sunshine in North Korea.  The distrust between North and South Korea, rooted in their antithetical political systems, cannot be erased.  This distrust has produced one war that has resulted in the death of millions, mostly Koreans, but also troops from the People’s Republic of China, the United States and member nations of the United Nations Command.  It has also produced an armistice that has served as the setting for a 60-year military standoff for, countless provocations, North Korea’s development into a de facto nuclear state, and countless failed attempts at reconciliation.

North Korea remains a family cult-centered dictatorship with the world’s fourth largest military, a poorly-fed populace isolated from the rest of the world, a failed economy, and the ignominious title of the world’s 23rd most failed state, The Republic of Korea in the South, has become an ultra-modern, full-fledged democracy with the world’s 15th largest economy and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) ranking as the world’s 6th most-wired country.

In the 41 years since the first inter-Korean talks of July 4, 1972, there have been 606 meetings between the North and the South.  These meetings have produced small results and great disappointments.  The July 4th 1972 Joint Declaration, supported by the leadership of the North’s Kim Il-sung and the South’s Pak Chong-hui, was significant in that it was the first official negotiations between the North and South. . In 1991, the North and South held several meetings to produce the “Basic Agreement,” signed in 1992, but never implemented the agreement due to the North’s pursuit of nuclear technology. The agreement would have established a security “holding pattern” while the North figured out how to deal with its security and economic problems in the context of the fall of the Soviet Union.

Perhaps the most significant development of these meetings was more meetings: two summits between the North’s Kim Jong-il  and two South Korean heads-of-state –  Presidents Kim Dae-jung and Roh Moo-hyun. The first summit, in 2000, produced the June 15 Declaration that stated the two Koreas’ determination to solve Korean reunification without outside interference.

All of these meetings have produced family reunions, billions of dollars of the South’s aid to the North, and on-again, off-again economic cooperation.  Yet, as we approach the 60th Anniversary of the Armistice Agreement on 27 July, military confrontation remains the dominant reality on the Korean Peninsula.  American troops remain after six decades of failed reconciliation, nuclear threats, and frequently deadly provocation.  The bottom line is that the biggest disappointment, particularly to North and South Koreans, is that there has been no progress whatsoever toward reconciliation and unification.

Why is it that, over 600 meetings later, the two Koreas have so little to show for their attempts at cooperation? A partial explanation may lie in the diametric opposition between the South Korean political ethos, which is based at least in part on trust and eventual reunification of the Koreas, and the political system in North Korea, which is explicitly based on distrust. This curious juxtaposition has made it difficult for the two nations to move beyond a stalemate.

Now, a new leader in the South must establish a format for dealing with the North in the face of constant threats. President Park’s Trustpolitik is designed to deal with the North realistically, rather than adopting the assumption of past administrations that the South’s generosity will eventually convince the North to cooperate and reduce tensions.  What most of the world does not realize, however, is that Trustpolitik is not simply a policy for dealing with the Kim family regime in the North – it is in fact the law of the land in South Korea.  Unification policy holds a significant place in South Korean law – so much so that it is addressed in the 1987 Constitution immediately after the three concepts of democracy, nationality and territory, all integral parts of the Korean socio-political psyche.  Article IV of the Constitution states unequivocally that unification must be addressed by the state and, as the President, Madame Park must have a unification policy.

But this is of no consequence in North Korea, where the political system is explicitly opposed to the sort of trust-building Ms. Park might have in mind.  The North’s own constitution merely serves as window-dressing for the outside world.  It is not taught in North Korean schools, is not available in libraries, nor is it viewable by North Koreans on the internet, which is non-existent in North Korea. It is the Korean Workers’ Party Charter that guides socio-political activity for all North Koreans and the charter specifically states that the party belongs to the Supreme Leader. But higher than that is the Ten Great Principles of Unitary Ideology.  These principles, expanded into 65 directives, inform each North Korean how they are to live by respecting the Supreme Leader.  It is a code that cements in the minds of every North Korean who is boss in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.  Violations of this code are addressed far more swiftly by the North’s security agencies than standard laws of addressing criminality.  The code exists because the Supreme Leader does not trust North Koreans in their loyalty to him.  The point is to teach every North Korean how to be loyal in a society where trust does not exist.  Every North Korean must be cautious in every word and deed.  Even North Korea’s highest ranking defector, Hwang Jang-yeop, ranked 22nd in the party hierarchy before defecting via China in 1997, has told many audiences that he had to instruct his 5-year-old granddaughter on North Korean political correctness, particularly on what not to say, based on the Ten Great Principles. Thus, the law of the land to the North is the word of the Supreme Leader.  He adjudicates as he will, without restraint, and based in his own values.  And those values do not contain trust.

North Korea’s Supreme leaders – there have been three of them in the Kim Family Regime with Kim Il-sung, his son Kim Jong-il, and now the grandson Kim Jong-un – have built a society on distrust.  The government politically classifies at the age of 17 every North Korean’s level of loyalty to the Supreme Leader – loyal, wavering, or disloyal.  The latter are literally referred to as the enemy and impure elements. Let’s state that again:  a significant proportion of North Korean citizens are so distrusted by the Supreme Leader that they are officially – through party policy – enemies of the state.

But “disloyal” citizens are not the only ones distrusted by the Supreme Leader.  Even those who are most supportive of the regime, members of the party’s Central Committee who can be regarded as the Kim Regime elite, are watched and monitored extensively by the security agencies.  And this, too, is done at the direction of the party.

The core of the regime-sanctioned distrust are the security agencies, which are extremely powerful in North Korea.  They create political terror and plenty of it.  They are the regime’s most important tool of survival.  These agencies report directly to the Supreme Leader, with their primary mission being to protect the regime security’s from internal challenges.  No one is to be trusted and everybody is to be watched.  The State Security Department, North Korea’s version of Nazi Germany’s Gestapo, maintains offices in all social, economic and administrative units in North Korea. It is tasked with detecting and arresting any person guilty of disloyalty – perceived or real – to the Supreme Leader.  Its sister agency, the Military Security Command, performs the same mission within the Korean People’s Army.  The Ministry of Public Security, or the national police, is grossly misnamed because it is not the public whose security with which they are concerned – it is the Supreme Leader’s.  The North’s People’s Safety Enforcement Law that guides police functions, states that the purpose of the police is “observing systems and maintaining order.” In other words, their purpose is to secure the regime and the Supreme Leader. Not surprisingly, these agencies also monitor each other. Finally, the courts – judges, prosecutors, and lawyers – work for the Supreme Leader and enforce the Ten Great Principles far more than civil law.

Distrust is so deeply embedded in the Kim Regime that concepts such as positive values, human rights, and trust itself have no place in the regime’s conduct, nor in its policy-making.  That not only includes domestic policy, but foreign and military policy as well.  South Korea’s Trustpolitik stands in direct contravention to the North’s entire political concept. South North negotiations to reopen the Kaesong Industrial Complex, now in its fifth session, are just the latest example of the North’s distrust of the South.  Despite South Korea’s good intentions, it should expect to be treated no better than the North’s own citizens.

On the 60th Anniversary of the Armistice Agreement, the Republic of Korea-United States alliance sees itself locked in a security dilemma.  History has proven that confidence-building measures have never worked on the Korean Peninsula.  This is because confidence-building itself requires trust – the kind President Park is looking for, but that the North cannot provide.,  For instance, the DPRK cannot tolerate monitors inside its military, nuclear or missile hierarchies, which would be a key maneuver to build confidence vis-à-vis the South.

Pyongyang’s barriers to trust are higher than ever  as demonstrated by its thermonuclear threats to the United States and President Obama, greater ruthlessness in dealing with North Korean refugees crossing into China and numerous purges of ranking regime elite, to name a few.  So too is the Armistice Agreement as important as it was 60 years ago in maintaining the security of the people of South Korea.  Though the North disavows the Armistice Agreement, it has demonstrated a healthy respect for the military might of the Alliance and generally, outside provocations, abides by the separation of forces aspects of the Armistice.  There is one thing the North can trust:  the Alliance will defend the South, at great sacrifice to the Kim Regime.

Photo Credit: Taylor Sloan
Categories:

July 17, 2013

Channel A Interview with HRNK Executive Director Greg Scarlatoiu

HRNK Executive Director Greg Scarlatoiu appeared live on South Korean television for an in-studio interview with Channel A in April.



To view the interview on Channel A's website, click here.
Categories:

July 02, 2013

Statement of Roberta Cohen at the ASAN Washington Forum 2013 on the Panel "Dealing with North Korea's Human Rights," June 25, 2013


It is time for the international community to address itself directly to the most serious of North Korea’s human rights violationsthe prison labor camps. Situated in the mountains of North Korea, the camps are estimated to hold some 100,000 to 200,000 prisoners, including whole families, many of whom are not expected to survive.  

The issue has come to the fore through the combined efforts of human rights NGOs and former North Korean prisoners who have escaped the country. For several decades, NGOs, academics and journalists from the United States, Western Europe and the Republic of Korea have conducted painstaking research to unearth verifiable information about the camps and North Korea’s overall human rights situation. They have come up with persuasive evidence despite the regime’s efforts to conceal its conduct through denial of access. The last time a human rights organization was allowed into North Korea was in 1995 when Amnesty International visited the capital under heavy restrictions. Since that time, no human rights NGO or UN human rights expert looking into North Korea has been allowed into the country. When in 2003 the Committee for Human Rights in North Korea published its widely quoted report about the penal labor camps, updated in 2012, it was unable to set foot in North Korea. It relied instead on the testimony of those who escaped the country. Of the 25,000 North Koreans who have made their way to the South over the past ten to fifteen years, hundreds were former prisoners and former prison guards. Their testimonies were found to largely corroborate one other and have been verified by satellite photos. North Koreans hiding in China have reinforced this testimony as well.

The accumulated information contradicts Pyongyang’s assertions that there are no human rights violations in North Korea nor any labor camps.  In fact, governments and the United Nations have come to rely on the NGO information in producing their own reports and policy positions. The information will prove critical as well to any transitional justice measures developed to hold North Korean authorities accountable. The South Korean NGO, the Data Base Center for North Korean Human Rights and others have been compiling information on individual prisoners, including those currently held in the camps and on the perpetrators so that the information can become the basis for accountability in the future. 

But there are serious challenges to this work that need to be addressed. Because the testimony of survivors has been damaging to North Korea, the Kim regime has sought to stem the flow of North Koreans escaping to tell their stories. It has been cracking down at the border in collaboration with China and has reduced by nearly half the number of North Koreans escaping through China to South Korea. In 2012, some 1500 reached the South as compared to close to 2,800 the year before. North Korea of late has been filling its detention centers with people trying to escape or those pushed back. Its most recent foray was into Laos to forcibly bring back a group of young North Koreans.

North Korean authorities have also harassed defectors in the South, sometimes by designating them enemies of the state, hacking into their computers or punishing their family members, friends and colleagues left behind. North Koreans who come out are haunted by what has happened or may happen to those with whom they were close.

Still another impediment to collecting information has been the lack of resources. Whether in the United States or South Korea, resources are limited when it comes to NGO research and publication of reports, even though the importance of putting the information out there could not be more evident. While new technology, the growing role of private markets, and some courageous North Koreans sending out messages have been eroding the information blockade, significant gaps remain in what we know. This includes the rate of deaths in detention, the extent to which whole families continue to be incarcerated, the status of existing camps and the numbers and punishment of North Koreans forcibly repatriated from China. Nonetheless, as a well-attended conference in Washington on the gulag concluded last year, “We know enough” to make a serious case meriting action.

Indeed, defector testimony – the main source of information about North Korea’s camp violations – has begun to be given more weight by UN officials and governments. For many years United Nations High Commissioners for Human Rights espoused the view that it was necessary for the UN itself to assess the situation on the ground in order to form an independent diagnosis. Even the annual State Department Human Rights Reports on North Korea include a disclaimer about defector testimony and being able fully to assess human rights conditions. But increasingly, UN and government officials have come to realize that the gold standard of proof in which international monitors can verify on the ground every piece of information is unrealistic when a country has a deliberate closed door policy. Moreover, constantly drawing attention to the lack of fully verifiable information on North Korea can serve as a rationale for inaction and could even have the unintended effect of lending support to North Korea’s claims that the human rights abuses reported are unfounded emanating from those who have betrayed their country.

Last year, the world body made important strides on this point. After some ten years of resolutions and requests for dialogue and entry into North Korea, the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in North Korea declared that human rights violations had reached “a critical mass.” And the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights took the decision to meet with camp survivors for the first time and called North Korea’s human rights situation unparalleled. She declared: “I don’t think the world should stand by and see this kind of situation, which is not improving at all.” With the support of Japan and the European Union, followed by South Korea and the United States, the 47 member Human Rights Council set up a commission of inquiry in March to investigate whether North Korea’s violations constitute crimes against humanity for which its officials could be held accountable. The vote was by consensus, reflecting a growing international unanimity around North Korea’s widespread abuses.  

But the commission of inquiry will face many challenges. When it comes to the penal labor camps, or to forced abductions, information is available to establish crimes against humanity, but when it comes to other violations, a great deal of time and effort will be needed to put together the information required. If the commission needs to extend its workit was allotted a yearthen Japan, the European Union, and the US-South Korean alliance should be ready to support its continuation, even though China will be on the Council next year. And these countries must be prepared to recommend strong steps if North Korea is found to be committing crimes against humanity.

The commission should not be considered an end in itself but rather part of a larger strategy at the UN to promote human rights in North Korea. There is a myriad of UN offices and agencies – whether on refugees, health, information, food and development, that are involved with North Korea. The entire system should be tapped to reinforce human rights where it can. Humanitarian agencies, for example, which emphasize the importance of reaching the most vulnerable in the society should at least be expected to strategize about gaining access to the camps, especially to reach children, who pose no danger to North Korea’s security.

In their bilateral relations with North Korea, both the United States and South Korea have been cautious when it comes to raising human rights issues. Political and strategic issues and preoccupation with North Korea’s nuclear program have been the main reasons. But it is also true that discussions over sensitive strategic and nuclear issues with the former Soviet Union did not stop human rights discussions. Nor do discussions with China preclude reference to human rights concerns. With North Korea the ground needs to shift and there are signs it is beginning to. In the past, the camps were always considered too provocative to talk about, but in March Ambassador Glyn Davies told the Senate that “The world is increasingly taking note” of North Korea’s human rights violations, and he specifically drew attention to North Korea’s “elaborate network of political prison camps” on which he commented at some length, and made reference to defector testimony – Shin Dong-hyuk and the book Escape from Camp 14.  “How the DPRK addresses human rights,” he continued, “will have a significant impact on prospects for improved U.S.-DPRK ties.” And in his confirmation hearings, Secretary Kerry also publicly pointed to the gulags in North Korea and spoke of an American leadership role here.


It is now time for these pronouncements to make their way into actual policy toward North Korea. Otherwise the issues which North Korea can benefit fromfood issues or family reunification issues for which they receive paymentswould principally be on the table together with possible training programs for select lawyers handpicked by Pyongyang.

Last month’s G8 communique urged North Korea for the first time to address human rights violations and it specified the abductions of foreigners and the treatment of returned refugees. But it omitted reference to the camps. And the May Joint Declaration of Presidents Obama and Park Geun-hye omitted human rights principles as a foundation of peaceful reunification. Denuclearization, democracy and a market economy were mentioned but do not adequately cover those principles.

On this 60th anniversary of the US-ROK alliance, it is time for the US and South Korea to begin to end the exceptionalism accorded North Korea in the human rights area, and to develop a strategy with other countries and international institutions for bringing onto the diplomatic agenda international access to North Korea’s political prisoners. 


Categories: