South Korea's perilous historical
revisionism By David Scofield
Once upon a time, South Korean schoolchildren
were taught to draw North Koreans as pigs and wolves,
ravening beasts, the "main enemy". Today, however, South
Korea makes nice in a kinder, gentler, misguided policy
of historical revisionism, reconciliation and
engagement. After all, the North Koreans are
misunderstood brethren. The real enemies are the United
States and Japan.
Now South Korea describes the
468 North Korean refugees who arrive last week as those
who escaped economic hardship. South Korea harasses
North Korean exiles and dissidents who try to run a
radio station telling the truth about the North. It
stifles talk of North Korean gulags, and its menacing
intelligence agents tell defectors who want to talk
about Pyongyang's deadly chemical experiments to keep
their mouths shut.
South Korea's policies of
engagement with North Korea are predicated on the belief
that modifying the perceptions and identities held by
the people of South Korea, officially softening how a
former aggressor is described and depicted throughout
society, will mitigate animosity and, the theory goes,
ultimately prompt North Korea similarly to change its
views of the South.
It appears very altruistic
and humane, but it does leave one important question
unanswered. What if the other side doesn't change its
views or moderate its stance? What if one side lowers
its guard, engages the other as an equal partner and not
as a belligerent, but the other side remains hostile?
Portraying Pyongyang as an insecure brother, a
misunderstood weaker sibling that only needs the right
reassurances and enticements to break its half-century
of hostility and jingoism toward the South, is a
high-stakes gamble. If North Korea does not moderate its
perceptions and depictions of its neighbor to the south
- and there's precious little evidence that it will -
then North Korea will hold a strategic advantage against
the overly pliant South - the tail wagging the
dog.
In fact, North Korea, which condemned South
Korea's admission of the refugee/defectors, has canceled
Tuesday's working-level talks on defusing the North's
nuclear-weapons programs. It was the third cancellation
of the working-level group involving both North and
South Korea, China, Japan, Russia and the US. It was to
be hosted by China.
The changes that Kim Dae-jung's
Sunshine Policy and Roh Moo-hyun's Peace and Prosperity
Program have made to South Korean society are nothing
short of monumental. Prior to Kim's election, the North
was widely regarded as dangerous and threatening, an
unmitigated evil to those who monitored its human-rights
abuses and the famine of the mid- to late 1990s, caused
by misguided political ideology. Indeed, some members
of President Roh Moo-hyun's affiliated party, OOP
(Our Open Party), are protesting the passing of the
censorious North Korean Human Rights Act in the US House
of Representatives; they hope to get between 80-90
lawmakers' signatures on a protest letter to the
US Senate, demanding senators quash the bill.
Now, North Korean refugees, like the
468 who arrived last week in Seoul via Vietnam, are not
heralded as survivors of a tyrannical regime, but rather
as defectors escaping economic hardship - privations
that many South Koreans believe are a direct result of
US policies toward the North, not North Korean leader
Kim Jong-il's callous disregard for human life. Reasoned
discussion of the true political cause of the horrors in
the North generally, and analysis of these most recent
newcomers specifically, is preempted. The South Korean
media and the government have largely abandoned the
issue, leaving questions of state persecution and the
reasons behind the absence of men in this latest exodus
- 90 were women and children - unanswered.
Nor does South Korea's engagement policy
encourage discussion of North Korea's gulags, or its illicit
trade in human labor, drugs, weapons and counterfeit
currency. On July 28, BBC 2 in the United Kingdom ran
interviews with two North Korean defectors in Seoul who
claim to have first-hand knowledge of human experiments
within the North's gulags. One defector, referred to in
the piece as Dr Kim, offered the name of the compound
used in experiments on North Korean civilians as
para-cyano-nitrobenzene, or NP-100. The cyanide-based
chemical was being developed for possible use on
military and civilian targets in South Korea. Both Dr
Kim and a previous defector who came forward with
similar testimony in January, Kwon Hyok, declared that
they are constantly harassed and threatened by South
Korean intelligence services to keep their knowledge to
themselves, stories of gas chambers and gulags in the
North being less than congruent with South Korea's
official depiction of North Korea.
The
military too sees a kinder, gentler
Pyongyang Within the South 's military as well,
the removal of the designation "main enemy" from South
Korea's defense White Paper due to be released this
October alters the defense dynamic considerably. The
North, long defined as the primary threat or "main
enemy" of the South, has now been redefined in line with
the policy of softening the nation's collective
perception of the North. The result, exemplified by
recent Northern Limit Line (NLL, the sea border between
North and South Korea) incursions, is a military command
reflecting little faith in the government's commitment
to defend the South against Northern aggression.
On July 14, a North Korean patrol boat - the
same boat that crossed the naval boundary in 2002 and
attacked a South Korean naval vessel, killing six
sailors - crossed into South Korean territorial waters.
South Korean naval forces responded by firing warning
shots across the vessel's bow. The North Korean ship
retreated, but its navy later protested, saying it had
utilized the newly designated radio frequency (a radio
"hotline" agreed to in general-level talks between the
North and South in late May) to contact the South Korean
navy and inform it of the transgression. Of course it
did not make the call until it had already crossed the
line, but nonetheless the South Korean navy was now in
the hot seat.
What emerged from the inquiry and
the subsequent resignations of naval Vice Admiral Kim
Seong-man and Defense Minister Cho Young-kil is a
picture of a navy that feared informing political
superiors of the radio transmission for fear they would
be ordered to hold their fire. Indeed, North Korean
ships have violated the NLL five times since agreeing to
use the specified frequency and protocols, a 500%
increase over the average of one incursion per month
before the communications agreement. What was to have
been a step forward for intra-Korean relations may
actually be a new strategy to weaken Southern defenses
as Northern ships violate the border then send messages
effectively preempting a response from the South: a
strategy that would buy the Northern side precious time
during a preemptive assault, by ensuring hesitation on
the part of the South in responding.
The same
such strategy may well be tested against South Korean
ground defenses along the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) after
US forces are redeployed from the area at the end of
next year. As for the South Korean field officers and
the defense forces they manage, it's hard to imagine how
they will maintain a seamless defense against the North
when senior command members and rank-and-file soldiers
are conditioned not to see an enemy in the North. In the
immediate aftermath of the deadly attack by North
Korea's navy two years ago, a surviving sailor was
quoted as saying, "We didn't believe the North would
attack us."
Schoolchildren once demonized the
North The pro-North indoctrination of the South
Korea's younger generation comes in the form of school
curriculum. The previous Kim Dae-jung administration
began "updating" the way the texts describe the North,
and indeed such a measure was long overdue. South
Koreans in their 30s and older tell of being instructed
to draw North Koreans as pigs and wolves in primary
school. These state-sanctioned activities demonized the
North Korean people as a whole, making no distinction
between the North Korean people and their despotic
leadership.
But today's policies promote
wholesale perception change, not a considered, reasoned
update of Cold War propaganda. The evil of the North
Korean regime has been mitigated; the nation's pampered
ruling elite and the starving huddled masses are again
one and the same from a policy perspective, and this is
not a temporary phenomenon. Most analysts believe that
even if the present "progressive" government in Seoul
were replaced with a conservative one, there would be
little change in the policy. Grand National Party (GNP)
leader Park Gun-hye went to visit the North Korean
leader before the last election. This move was believed
by many to be designed to assure North Korea that the
current policies of engagement started by Kim Dae-jung
would continue regardless of the person occupying in the
Blue House.
South Korean policies of engagement
have been successful in changing how South Koreans view
the North. Most South Koreans no longer view the North
as the primary threat to their security. That
designation is increasingly reserved for the United
States. These policies of rapprochement have
successfully tapped into South Korea's inherent "one
blood, one people" view of the world. Teaching graduate
students in South Korea, this correspondent was often
struck by how deep this blood affiliation goes, as
students majoring in NGO (non-governmental organization)
development - many self-described human-rights activists
- would challenge evidence of atrocities committed by
the Northern regime. Students would often assert in so
many words: "Prove there are people starving and being
tortured, there is no proof ... it's all a campaign by
the United States and Japan to demonize the North and
weaken Korea."
Politically prickly issues from
South Korea's recent past have a history of being buried
or politically manipulated, leaving rumors and animosity
to fester as a true accounting of events and the
reconciliation that should accompany it proves elusive.
Perhaps then it's not surprising that many policy
architects in the South believe that North-South
reconciliation can be achieved while turning a blind eye
to the callous indifference to human life so often
demonstrated by the leadership in North Korea. But at
some point the South will have to answer for its myopia,
its refusal even to raise the issue with the North or
include the well-documented proof of crimes against
humanity in the administration's dialogue with the
people. A North-South relationship predicated on denial
and half-truths is unlikely to bring lasting peace and
stability.
David Scofield, former
lecturer at the Graduate Institute of Peace Studies,
Kyung Hee University, is currently conducting
post-graduate research at the School of East Asian
Studies, University of Sheffield, United Kingdom.
(Copyright 2004 Asia Times Online Ltd. All
rights reserved. Please contact content@atimes.com for
information on our sales and syndication
policies.)
|