Archive for March, 2006
Posted by joshua on March 31, 2006 at 10:59 am · Filed under Uncategorized, Censorship, Terrorism/Iraq
[A] growing proportion of Americans are expressing unfavorable views of Islam, and a majority now say that Muslims are disproportionately prone to violence, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.
The poll found that nearly half of Americans — 46 percent — have a negative view of Islam, seven percentage points higher than in the tense months after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, when Muslims were often targeted for violence.
What’s changed? I agree with the article’s suggestion that it was the cartoons. We perceived that the vast majority of Muslims believed that violence was an appropriate response to a Danish newspaper printing some fairly mild cartoons, for circulation in Denmark. If Danes shouldn’t have the freedom to print and read what they want in their own country, we reason, neither are we. The Abdul Rahman controversy sealed it. If a man who converts from Islam to Christianity can’t live safely in a democratic Muslim nation, it’s fair to say that Islam has a tolerance problem.
The implications of the cartoon rage is wider, of course. The message of that episode is that Islam — as practiced by a perceived (fairly or otherwise) majority of Muslims — is irreconcilable with the right of Americans to say, print, write, and read what they want in their own country. Judging by stories like this and this, the censorship has had considerable success.
We can take two lessons from this: first, that violence works and will be rewarded by the self-censorship of the cowardly; and second, that the censorship comes at the price of earning universal contempt. And neither of those results is good news.
Posted by joshua on March 31, 2006 at 10:28 am · Filed under Media Criticism, Korean Society, Korean Law, Censorship, Democracy
That’s the conclusion of the International Press Institute, whose latest country report blames the Roh Administration for pursuing a political vendetta against unfriendly press:
Towards this end, in 2005, the government used its authority to create legislation and use it as a weapon in its fight against the three big conservative dailies: the Chosun Ilbo, the Dong-a Ilbo and the Joong Ang Ilbo.
At the beginning of January, the governing Uri Party pushed through the National Assembly two press reform bills: the “Act Governing the Guarantee of Freedom and Functions of Newspapers” (”Newspaper Law or Press Law”) and the “Newspaper and Press Arbitration Law” (”Press Arbitration Law”). Both bills have been criticised and deemed unconstitutional by the opposition Grand National Party, the country’s largest media groups as well as international organisations, including IPI.
You should be wincing by now, given the lousy free-speech credentials and questionable constitutional interpretations of certain GNP’ers. The IPI would have done itself a big favor by not even citing them. On the other hand, this criticism is on target:
At a 27 June public hearing for revision of the laws, attorney Lee Jae-gyo said, “The press law is effectively aimed at offering carrots to pro-government media outlets, such as broadcasting companies and [the on-line newspaper] Oh My News, while imposing sticks on others, including Dong-A Ilbo, Chosun Ilbo, and Joong Ang llbo.”
You can read a longer, more detailed post on South Korea’s efforts to control the press here.
h/t: (of course) Chosun Ilbo
Posted by joshua on March 30, 2006 at 5:51 pm · Filed under Uncategorized, China, Human Rights, China & Korea, Refugees, Defectors
This is an encouraging development. Can anyone recall the White House getting involved on behalf of a North Korean refugee before this?
STATEMENT BY THE PRESS SECRETARY
The United States is gravely concerned about China’s treatment of Kim Chun-Hee. Despite U.S., South Korean, and UNHCR attempts to raise this case with the Chinese, Ms. Kim, an asylum seeker in her thirties, was deported to North Korea after being arrested in December for seeking refuge at two Korean schools in China. We are deeply concerned about Ms. Kim’s well-being. The United States notes China’s obligations as a party to the UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol, and believes that China must take those obligations seriously. We also call upon the Government of China not to return North Korean asylum seekers without allowing UNHCR access to these vulnerable individuals.
Yonhap has more here, including the fact that Hu Jintao will soon visit Washington. This is a significant step in the right direction.
Thanks to two readers for forwarding.
Posted by joshua on March 30, 2006 at 5:46 pm · Filed under China, Human Rights
If true, this report removes China’s human rights issue to a whole new depth of depravity.
There is a horrifying story going around the world: In the northeast of China, thousands of prisoners are being held, so that they can be killed for their organs. The prisoners are practitioners of Falun Gong, the meditation-and-exercise system. The facility at which they are being held — called a “concentration camp” or a “death camp” — is at Sujiatun. Chinese human-rights activists believe that this name should cause the same shudders as Treblinka and the others.
Whether China will immediately permit the ICRC to inspect Sujiatun and investigate these allegations is a real test of its commitment to becoming a member of the civilized world. It would also convict China of rank hypocrisy, thus cheapening some very legit grievances about Japan’s debt to history.
This statement from the article also struck me; it could just as well have been written about North Korea:
And I recall what Robert Conquest, the great analyst of totalitarianism, once told me: The world has seldom wanted to believe witnesses. Ten, 20, or 30 years later, maybe, but rarely sooner.
Testimony out of the early Soviet Union was scoffed at; these were “rumors in Riga.” Tales of the Holocaust were Jewish whining. When escapees from Mao spilled into Hong Kong, they were “embittered warlords.” When Cubans landed in Florida, they were “Batista stooges.” And so on.
I wonder if Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch will be as vocal about this as they were about Gitmo. Or whether they’ll give it the “footnote” treatment they’ve given to North Korea.
Posted by joshua on March 30, 2006 at 5:20 pm · Filed under Uncategorized, Six-Party Talks, WMD, Diplomacy
It does seem that we’re sticking to our guns on counterfeiting. I can hardly wait for the North Korean response. Should be a real beaut. More.
Posted by joshua on March 30, 2006 at 5:15 pm · Filed under Europe
Headline: “Protests Bring France to Standstill“
Posted by joshua on March 30, 2006 at 5:14 pm · Filed under WMD, Human Rights, Refugees, Defectors, Washington Views
The provision is similar to one that was a part of the failed North Korean Freedom Act, and was inserted into the Immigration Bill by Senator Sam Brownback, the greatest champion of the North Korean people in that body. Unless you’ve been in a secluded location, you may realize that the House and Senate have yet to bridge major difference in that bill. Still, this quote encouraged me:
One Washington source said, “Last year, the North Korea policy was much talked and little done, but it seems to be different this year.”
It’s about time. Thanks to a reader for forwarding.
Posted by joshua on March 30, 2006 at 5:04 pm · Filed under Uncategorized, Famine & Food Aid, Human Rights, Refugees, Washington Views
I’ll simply link this and recommend it in its entirety. The interviewer asks informed and sharp questions on refugees, regime change, and food aid.
Lefkowitz’s answers were adequate but obviously scripted. He’s trying to give the impression that the U.S. will soon start accepting refugees without getting ahead of the Administration; I’m cautiously inclined to believe him, mainly based on other information I’ve heard.
Posted by joshua on March 30, 2006 at 4:57 pm · Filed under Uncategorized, Terrorism/Iraq
… she was treated well.
Posted by joshua on March 30, 2006 at 3:20 pm · Filed under An Alliance?, Anti-Americanism, Korean Law, UCMJ & SOFA, U.S. Military, U.S. & Korea
Prosecution Exhibit A should be this photograph of a South Korean leftist thug putting his hands on a United States Marine. While there are numerous reasons why this is widely considered unwise, those reasons don’t include any reason to fear that the leftist-dominated Korean government will actually prosecute people like this for assault.
“Assault” is what you call it when one person puts his hands on another with hostile intent.
It’s a tribute to this Marine’s discipline that he didn’t give this guy a 5.56mm colostomy. It will also be very telling if the South Koreans, yet again, pass on the opportunity to protect U.S. service members from political violence.
The message to Korea should be this: use your laws to make your country a safe place for our service members, or else learn to live without them.
Photo: Chosun Ilbo.
Posted by joshua on March 30, 2006 at 10:07 am · Filed under Media Criticism, Korean Society, Censorship, Activism
A trusted reader in Seoul, Brendan Brown, is casting doubt on the Chosun Ilbo’s story reporting that “Yodok Story” is a sold-out runway success (see this entry, and this one). The reader says of the Chosun report:
[I]t’s crap. I got my wife to call today and ask about the availability of seats for the performances before and a[f]ter April 17 and there are many seats available.
A friend of mine who went before I did also said that most of the theatre was empty when he went.
It’s a disappointment, and I certainly wish “Yodok Story” all the best, but I won’t echo a story about which I have serious doubts. Readers in Seoul, what say you? You can try to book tickets of your own here. I’d be interested in hearing what they tell you.
A new report in the Christian Science Monitor also adds this telling detail:
The show finally opened March 15, after finding a new home at the Seoul Educational and Cultural Center, far from the center of town, but still spacious and modern enough to mount the production. The show’s original run will wrap up this weekend, though it may be extended or play in other cities.
Emphasis mine. Sorry, but I really don’t believe that a runaway success would play for such a short period of time. It does appear that “Yodok Story” was starved of oxygen in Korea, and that’s unfortunate.
———–
So what of the “government pressure” angle? Just get a load of how far the government’s position has moved from its previous full-scale denial:
Government officials refuse to confirm or deny charges of pressure to ban the show. For the record, they say they have not seen it and are not interested in doing so.
Nor has Chung Seung-San been completely stoic in the face of that pressure, admitting that ”[w]e toned it down and revised it a lot.” Hmmmm.
Kudos to Don Kirk for asking both the government and those behind “Yodok Story” many detailed questions, including about that fishy “kidney” loan. Chung actually produces a contract(!), which may not prove much of anything, but overall, Kirk does seem to have several people telling him a reasonably consistent story, even as the government backs down from its denial.
I suspect we haven’t heard the last about this one, but the more I hear, the less I believe anyone.
Posted by joshua on March 29, 2006 at 8:00 pm · Filed under WTF?, Blogs & Blogging
No, we are not a CIA front, but thanks a million for asking around at the local think tanks! The best publicity is always free.
With deepest affection,
Joshua
Posted by joshua on March 28, 2006 at 10:10 pm · Filed under Media Criticism, Human Rights, Korean Society, Korean Law, Refugees, Defectors, Censorship, Activism, Democracy
Update: New information (see comments) suggests that the Chosun Ilbo may have considerably exaggerated the success of ”Yodok Story;” the government also looks to be backing away from denying that it put pressure on producers and investors.
Update 2 (8/06): I withhold final judgment, but the preponderence of reports I’ve heard go like this: plenty of empty seats at the first curtain call, but the seats tended to fill up to nearly full with the late arrival of ticketholders.
Original Post: In one of the great ironies of this young year, “Yodok Story” has had a splendid opening because of the very people who tried keep it from seeing its first opening act. The Chosun Ilbo reports that many shows are sold out, and that the play’s Web site has crashed from the overflowing traffic (though OFK/TKL readers have known for weeks that the site has labored under what we will call technical “challenges”).
A month after the fact, the government finally got around to denying reports that it tried to intimidate “Yodok Story” producers into watering down the atrocity stories in the script, or that it had a hand in pressuring some investors to pull out of the production. Director Chung Seong-San also claims that someone threatened his life. Soon afterward, a flood of media attention attracted new investors, donors, and the interest of theataah-goers.
Whoever attempted to stop “Yodok Story” failed miserably. Not only did the play get most of its publicity from its enemies free of charge, so did the cause those enemies tried to conceal from the world’s attention. The latest of many Western news sources to describe “Yodok Story” is the BBC, which covered opening-night reaction by the audience whose reaction is the most telling: other defectors. In the process, the BBC tells its readers those defectors’ stories, and about the people who didn’t live to tell their own.
——————
Robert Koehler picks up some good commentary from a Korean blogger and a poet from the North, but otherwise, it pains me to say, missed the point widely. His focus on who was in the audience — as opposed to the subject matter on stage — brought him perilously close to giving us a thinking person’s answer to an Oscar night “worst dressed” list. There’s no arguing with Robert’s assertion that the paleocon politicans in attendance had mixed motives. I have enough fingers on one hand to count all of the sincere politicians in South Korea without even putting down my beer. (He makes a stronger point when it comes to Hwang Jang Yop, however; after all the people Hwang probably sent to die in Yodok before his defection, he still aspires to political leadership and claims that Juche is “misunderstood.” On the other hand, Hwang contributed money, so they can’t very well keep him out.) As it happens, I’m not being a great fan of Park Geun-Hye or her entourage myself, and I’ve been a consistent critic of their bouts of authoritarianism against people whose views I despise. Yet I still applaud them for recognizing the moral rightness and political appeal of demanding the closure of concentration camps in their own country, and I don’t see how those two points are mutually exclusive. What kind of nation Korea wants to be — free or slave, united or divided, righteous or mercenary — is an issue that deserves a place at the very center of Korea’s national debate. Ditto Lee Myung-Bak, another politician of whom I’ve never been especially fond. Their mixed records on promoting freedom are certainly less shocking than the fact that certain former human rights activists were conspicuously absent from the gallery.
What’s more, I respectfully disagree with how Robert characterizes, even dismisses, the allegations of government censorship:
This was no doubt helped by the Chosun Ilbo, which lent what we’ll call an extremely sympathetic ear to “Yodok Story” director Jung Sung-san’s claims that his musical was the victim of pressure from the South Korean government, which he said feared his show would upset Pyongyang.
Robert’s link goes to a post which refers to a Chosun Ilbo story that actually reported this back in February:
South Korean government agencies are demanding changes to the story, which they say dwells too heavily on the negative aspects of the camp, according to producers.
Emphasis mine. Thus, we presumably have at least two producers and one director telling the reporter that there was government pressure, which is to say nothing of the investors who pulled out, or the “key member[] of the production team” who quit. In fact, Chung’s story is that –
“After reading our script, government officials demanded that we change part of the story, saying it’s too much,” Chung said. “I got a phone call, I don’t know if it was a government official, saying ‘It’s so easy to get you. You will be punished.’”
Again, emphasis mine. (The part of Chung’s story I tend to have real trouble with is the part about his kidney. Fwiw, a well-connected acquaintance passes along the unconfirmed rumor that a Norwegian investor paid off the kidney loan, and you can take at the face value at which I offer it. And as I will explain in closing, it’s all completely beside the point.)
I’m certainly not in a position to vouch for Chung or the Chosun Ilbo’s reporter. I wasn’t there. I agree that it’s certainly good journalism to report that the government denied the story. That said, a denial from the (anti-) Unification Ministry doesn’t move the needle on my truth meter.
I have little regard for any denial by the (anti-) Unification Ministry when it comes to denials that it runs interference for North Korea. Only last week, the papers appear to have caught the Ministry telling a little white lie about an “expression of regret” to North Korea over South Korean press reports that described South Korean abductees as, well, “abductees.” Journalists reported that the Ministry tried to coerce or massage the journalists’ choice of words to avoid giving offense to Kim Jong Il. As a result, the journalists walked away en masse.
Robert goes even further, alleging that critics of the government have come dangerously close to slandering the government internationally.” OK, assume for argument’s sake that these allegations are all made up. Slander includes “defam[ing] and damag[ing] another’s reputation,” which I take to mean that the South Korean government is really some sort of maligned paragon of free expression. Consider that defense in light of a recent report by South Korea’s own National Human Rights Commission, in which nearly one in five defectors claimed that the South Korean government pressured them to keep quiet about what they saw in North Korea. And of course, the stories of this government trying to censor press coverage critical of North Korea are very old news by now.
Chung also reported some anonymous death threats, which past practice suggests probably came from the usual suspects — pro-Pyongyang thugs who always seem to have a good head start on the police, even after their dirty work is done. The Southern cadres of the Ministry of Public Security have had quite a presence in Seoul recently, including:
Chung has been telling about these threats since at least last November, and by February, someone was still being pressured/threatened by someone. Under those circumstances, the government had a duty to provide some meaningful protection.
—————
Where have we taken this discussion, then? Away from where it properly belongs: the merits of the indictment that “Yodok Story” presents. I suppose I should set a macro on my keyboard to repeat the obvious fact that you can’t definitively verify what the North Koreans would kill you for trying to tell the world. I’m not a great believer in presumptively denying undisputed, facially credible, and mightily important charges against those who are obviously keeping some very awful secrets.
It pains me to have taken this long to ask the questions that really matter: Do guards in the North Korean gulag arbitrarily execute prisoners? Rape female inmates? Kill “racially impure” babies? Starve and torture with abandon? Keep kids in the camps? Intentionally create the conditions in which thousands die every year? Gas a few of them, just to see how much longer the parents take to gasp out their last breaths than their kids? The evidence for those charges is compelling, though Pyongyang is always free to help Seoul deny them by letting us have a look at the evidence. And everyone, including me, is pissing about ad hominem minutiae? As opposed to the question of whether humanity has a conscience . . . or the will to follow it? In my book, that dwarfs who’s running for what and who’s earned the right to talk about this.
We should all be talking about this.
And thanks to “Yodok Story,” more of us are.
Posted by joshua on March 28, 2006 at 7:04 pm · Filed under Famine & Food Aid, Human Rights, Activism
The Jawa Report has a must-see flash movie from LiNK, whose sophistication at spreading a powerful message continues to grow. I spoke to Adrian Hong today, and I don’t believe he’d mind me saying that he sounds weary, like a man working himself to the point of sheer exhaustion.
If you have even a small amount of extra time or money on your hands, they could use it for a good purpose. Please hit their PayPal button or volunteer some time.
Posted by joshua on March 28, 2006 at 6:52 pm · Filed under NK Economics, An Alliance?, Appeasement, WMD, Refugees, Defectors, Censorship, U.S. & Korea
This guy no doubt can tell us where a few bodies are buried (not literally, one hopes):
A North Korean employee of a state-run company defected to the South with three family members recently, sources in the Foreign Ministry confirmed yesterday, correcting some media reports that the man was a diplomat. He worked at a trading company run by the government, the ministry sources said. They gave few other details of the matter, citing its sensitivity.
Unfortunately, it’s almost a sure bet the South Koreans will try to keep the Americans from debriefing him and getting anything embarassing on North Korea. The story of what happened to defector Bok Ku Lee, also from a state trading company, is instructive:
Upon my arrival, I was debriefed by South Korea’s National Intelligence Service, and occasionally put in the hands of unsophisticated American questioners in Seoul. Remarkably, the South Korean officials made it clear to me that I would be in danger if I were to speak out about the WMD programs I had worked on or the atrocities I had witnessed. It soon became obvious that they feared my testimony because it might jeopardize South Korea’s “sunshine policy,” which seeks to keep the North’s repressive regime in power in order to avoid the economic consequences to the South were it to collapse.
Lee later evaded South Korean intelligence, made his way to the U.S. Senate, and told his story. The South Koreans responded by harassing Mr. Lee’s wife, causing Lee to seek help from Senator Richard Lugar, who asked the South Koreans to kindly lay off. After that, the story made its way to the Wall Street Journal’s editorial page.
·
Next entries »