One Free Korea OneFreeKorea freekorea.us home faq about news blogs plan-b camps interviews google earth

North Korean Gulag Survivors Tell Their Survival Stories to Bored South Korean Soldiers

As it turns out, inviting a North Korean gulag survivor to speak to South Korean troops is a lot like inviting Elie Wiesel to speak at a Pat Buchanan rally:

After speaking recently to a group of young South Korean soldiers about North Korea’s harsh labor camps, former prisoner Jung Gyoung Il — himself once a soldier in North Korea’s massive army — was stunned by the questions from the audience. One soldier asked how many days of leave North Korean soldiers were given. Another asked if North Korean soldiers were allowed to visit their girlfriends. No one showed any curiosity about the notorious network of gulags, a signature marker of the North’s brutality toward its own people.

In a rare acknowledgment, the South Korean government recently noted in a report that hundreds of thousands of North Koreans are languishing in the prison camps. But Seoul has made no public effort to exert pressure on Kim Jong Il’s regime over the issue. And many South Koreans, who hold deeply conflicted feelings toward their communist neighbor, are reluctant to even concede that the camps exist. [Stars & Stripes]

Actually, I don’t think this guy’s views are conflicted at all:

Jung Wook-sik of the Peace Network, a group of civic activists, said the existence of the gulags is “not relevant” in South Korea because many citizens feel their own human rights are being abused. Lee has been heavily criticized for, among other things, subduing peaceful protests and firing members of a teacher’s union that questioned his administration.

And it’s exactly the same thing, of course! You do remember Jung, don’t you, from when he was writing at OhMyNews as “Cheong Woon Sik?”

David Hawk, author of the study “The Hidden Gulag: Exposing North Korea’s Prison Camps,” said little was known about the gulags until about five years ago, when large numbers of North Koreans managed to defect from the famine-stricken country.

Nothing in there surprises me much after four years in the USFK.

[Update: Reading more carefully now, I realize that “Jung Wook-Sik” may not be the same guy as “Cheong Woon Sik” after all.]

Jonathan Gardner said,

February 8, 2010 @ 2:51 pm

It’s like trying to explain to my dad that Social Security and Medicare are not solvent, and there is no way you can expect the younger generation to pay into a system when they have no expectation of getting any return at all. It’s such a horrible truth that people refuse to believe it at all. Losing $60,000 all for naught is very difficult fact to deal with.

I am sure it is the same with the South Koreans. What the North is doing to their brothers demands action. It demands that certain sacrifices be made in the name of human dignity and rights. Yes, there may be an artillery barrage that could kill hundreds of thousands of South Koreans in a single day. But we cannot let this regime stand any longer.

Osumashi Kinyobe said,

February 8, 2010 @ 5:29 pm

Perhaps I’m being cynical but the indifference and soft-ball questions indicate a country having lived with excess and liberty for far too long while their cousins starved. Imagine the concern if the US were to pull out of South Korea completely.

The_Incredible_HUK said,

February 8, 2010 @ 7:49 pm

Joshua, first off, thanks for your service, and as an ethnic Korean, thank you for having served in the ROK, to help protect the democracy and freedom enjoyed by these spoiled brats, many of whom hated and demonstrated against you and your comrades-in-arms.

Now, Joshua, as someone who actually dealt w/ South Koreans in both work and social spheres, you won’t be shocked by what I’ll share here. But perhaps the viewpoint of a Korean-American will add value to this discussion.

I have raised the issue of North Korean suffering to many expatriate ROK nationals and most of the responses I got ranged from the following:

“Really? There are camps in North Korea?”
“Well, they’re really poor. That’s why they’re looked down on in the South.”
“Where did you get this information? I never heard of this when I was in Seoul.”

And way too often, that uber-annoying Korean moan/expression which means ultimately nothing but which barely masked their apathy: “엉… 그래요?”

I find this extremely ironic given a lot of these expatriates, and their Korean-speaking immigrant counterparts who themselves became expatriates but at much younger ages upon immigration, often critically eye Korean-Americans as “insufficiently Korean” but who, for all their rhetoric of “정” and “단일민족” and ethnic brotherhood, couldn’t care less about what’s happening north of the DMZ - and yet many of them will side with the clowns who protested American bovine products nearly 2 years ago.

That is why, even though I’m an ethnic Korean myself, I’d love to see these spoiled ingrates shake in their boots were USFK to depart. They complain about US troops but don’t want them to leave; they exploit USFK but have no qualms about anti-US demonstrations w/ desecrations of the US flag, all the while displaying absolutely no compassion or concerns towards their brethren who are eating rats and tree bark to survive in the Camps.

The_Incredible_HUK said,

February 8, 2010 @ 7:49 pm

Correction: “I, as an ethnic Korean, thank you…”

MrChips said,

February 8, 2010 @ 11:01 pm

The idea that USFK will pull out in the near future is pie in the sky hope. That said, I think USFK can, and should, sit down and begin a study that empirically connects ROK manpower, in terms of number and months of service, to US forces in terms of thousands of trigger pullers. In other words, how many US soldiers does it take to reduce the number of months a ROK conscript has to serve by one…by two? Then reverse that logic and tell the ROKs, you are going to get XX thousand fewer troops in wartime so you better start tacking on a few more months, or starting conscripting chicks. Amazing that the ROKs still believe in Syngman Rhee’s philosophy of “fight to the last American.”

kushibo said,

February 9, 2010 @ 12:49 am

Amazing that the ROKs still believe in Syngman Rhee’s philosophy of “fight to the last American.”

Did any South Koreans even get killed in that war? Sheesh.

KCJ said,

February 9, 2010 @ 7:18 am

I arrived in Korea for my second tour in the summer of 2008 and had my KATUSA data-mine the Korean media for stories about religion and North Korea. Quite apart from his efforts I discovered the life-changing movie The Crossing which was released that summer to critical acclaim and commercial failure. I couldn’t for the life of me understand why such a relevant, well-made, emotionally rivetting docudrama could be so ignored in the ROK.

Then I set up our post theater to show the movie to US and ROK Soldiers and DA Civilians. Some brought their family members. They wept. They look stunned. I did some post-showing informal interviews which revealed that even the more senior people had no idea about what goes on in North Korea or (even more glaringly) along the Sino-Korean border. A ROK senior officer thanked me profusely and said his heart was opened to the suffering of his northern relatives.

The younger ROK soldiers are more or less clueless other than what they learn about ideology and the enemy. I can’t tell you how many ROK soldiers have told me they learned more about North Korea in 15 minutes with me over lunch than in 25 years of living in South Korea. I don’t say that to be admired - its my job to know the religious dynamics of the battlefield. What is sad is that even the General Officers seem utterly clueless that Juche is a religion and must be dealt with thusly, especially if a stability operation ensues after the inevitible regime collapse. It will be Iraqx10 if we don’t get some kind of understand about who these people are and what they have been through.

I think there is also a survival tactic practiced by the ROK people - denial - due to the fact that they have lived under constant threat of total annhilation for decades with more than 13,000 pieces of artillery and rockets aimed at them at all times. You learn to ignore it and deny it and get on with your own life. Intellectual engagement can be frightening.

The reality is that the defectors have now pulled back the curtains on what is really going on in the DPRK with alacrity for the first time ever. The information is really just gaining steam since what? 2005? Soon it will be impossible to ignore - whether by common knowledge, or by a more likely scenario - civil war in North Korea.

We (US) are no better. We have a military at war while the country goes to the mall.

irene said,

February 9, 2010 @ 1:30 pm

Well-said, KCJ. Thank you for your leadership and insight…as I know others would agree.

Sonagi said,

February 9, 2010 @ 3:58 pm

“We (US) are no better. We have a military at war while the country goes to the mall. “

Finally, there’s an idea you and I can agree on. Our wars have run up the federal deficit while shopping has piled up consumer debt.

MrChips said,

February 9, 2010 @ 8:06 pm

“We (US) are no better. We have a military at war while the country goes to the mall. “

ditto that. If a war is worth waging it’s worth the whole country being involved. I’m very uncomfortable with the mantra since 2001 of “preserving our way of life” as that has panned out as the military doing all the work. I know I’ve seen all the “we support our troops” commercials but really… how much of the nation is involved in actively providing support to the troops? It’s an out-of-sight, out-of-mind convenience for us with a patronizing of our troops on a national scale.

Kushibo, if you think I was downplaying Korean losses in the war then you, either willingly or not, ignored the point. It’s tragic, but implicit, that people die in a war taking place in their own country. Not the point. But if you deny that Rhee demanded the US continue to fight for reunification by force since his army could not do it alone, and that he considered it betrayal when Eisenhower followed the US’ best interest in getting out, and now the ROK government today insists on American soldiers being committed to a conflict that they continually absolve their own citizens responsibility for, through downsizing of the military and reduction of conscript service, then you will never be concerned with getting the point. Per the 2020 defense reform enacted during the Ro admin, by 2014 conscripts will only serve 18 months. Compare that to the standard 10 years a north Korea conscript serves. You can’t train a good soldier in 18 months. And you certainly can’t expect reservists in the south who report for mere hours a year and shoot an eye-popping 5 rounds a year to pose a threat to any trained enemy. Yet still with all that complacency, the US is absolutely essential in defending the ROK? Rhee’s philosophy is alive and well in the ROK and while Rhee might have been the exception in 1953, the philosophy has gained for too much traction with the new generation.

kushibo said,

February 10, 2010 @ 12:51 am

Mr Chips wrote:

Kushibo, if you think I was downplaying Korean losses in the war then you, either willingly or not, ignored the point.

My apologies to you, who I know wasn’t downplaying Korean losses, but the statement reminded me of a common meme whose disseminators really do seem to forget that South Korea’s losses were many times that of the US and the UN and Korea still expends considerable treasure and severe opportunity costs in its own defense. But that is not your meme, so my apologies for glibly addressing your comment in this way; you are right about Rhee, though Rhee also saw many of his own countrymen die for what he had hoped to achieve.

And I don’t like the watering down that Roh Moohyun brought to the ROK military and its alliance with the US, and I’d like to see some of the policies he inflicted reversed or altered.

KCJ said,

February 10, 2010 @ 2:40 am

Compare that to the standard 10 years a north Korea conscript serves. You can’t train a good soldier in 18 months.

That pretty much says it all.

Arcane said,

February 10, 2010 @ 5:21 am

a common meme whose disseminators really do seem to forget that South Korea’s losses were many times that of the US and the UN and Korea still expends considerable treasure and severe opportunity costs in its own defense.

South Korea doesn’t take its own defense seriously and is heavily reliant upon the United States. The S.K. government spends only 2.8% of its GDP on defense (less than 20% of the budget), which is a little more than half of what the U.S. spends. Meanwhile, they continue to operate aging military systems and many military modernization programs have been canceled and the money rerouted into social welfare programs instead. The U.S. probably spends more on its bases and troops assigned to the Pacific to protect S.K. than their own government does.

The S.K. people have been insulated for too long under the American umbrella and have grown comfortable and apathetic. I once thought we had good reason to be here, but if the South Koreans don’t even take their own defense seriously and refuse to recognize the truth, why should we be there?

kushibo said,

February 10, 2010 @ 6:23 am

Arcane wrote:

South Korea doesn’t take its own defense seriously and is heavily reliant upon the United States. The S.K. government spends only 2.8% of its GDP on defense (less than 20% of the budget), which is a little more than half of what the U.S. spends.

South Korea’s 2.8 percent is higher than most of the US’s allies, including Canada, Japan, Mexico, the Philippines, Germany, the UK, and Taiwan. (Japan is the only one with a built-in excuse.)

And this percentage rate is not counting the opportunity costs of subjecting most of the males in the country to an average of two to two-and-a-half years of mandatory military service during some of their most productive years. Those men are paid far less than the comparative rate they would get in the United States, which also cuts down on the monetary amount, but it does come at a significant cost.

The idea that “South Korea doesn’t take its own defense seriously” is a fiction. Besides, South Korea as of late (i.e., under Lee) has been expanding its cooperative role with the US outside the Peninsula, and that should also count for something.

MrChips said,

February 10, 2010 @ 9:01 pm

“subjecting most of the males in the country to an average of two to two-and-a-half years of mandatory military service during some of their most productive years.”

Conscription is 22 months and its going down 1 month each year until 2014, bottoming out at 18 months. Hasn’t been over 2 years for a while now. Also, while the unemployment rate is relatively low in South Korea as a whole, between 3-3.5%, that doesn’t include the 20s generation, the pool from which these conscripts are drawn. That rate is hovering around 9% and doesn’t include the 40% who have withdrawn from labor force pool to focus on education, owing to the poor job prospects. The conscripts only get paid about 20,000won a month, which is peanuts. However, all of their necessary expenses are paid for AND they have a job for just under 2 years which would be unlikely given the job prospects for their generation in their “most productive years.”

“South Korea’s 2.8 percent is higher than most of the US’s allies, including Canada, Japan, Mexico, the Philippines, Germany, the UK, and Taiwan. (Japan is the only one with a built-in excuse.)”

Of all of the US allies, only the Philippines has any significant threat that the military has to deal with. Comparing % of GDP for defense between nations where 1 lives under the constant threat of war and the others are at relative peace without the same prospect for war seems like cheating.

I think the investment focus the ROK has on high tech, such as AEGIS, F-15K, K2, and K21 IFV at the expense manpower, training, and short range transport shows that the ROK doesn’t take its defense seriously. Or, maybe a better way of putting that, it doesn’t find the threat of north Korea to be credible. My question is, how much of that credibility comes from the US presence.

Irene said,

February 10, 2010 @ 9:39 pm

No wonder none of you are politicians - accounting suits you better. Can we look at the big picture, for once? That is, how important is Asia as a region to the US? Do we want to spend as much money on that region as, say, the Middle East?
Furthermore, how serious are we about nuclear deterrence? Is anybody kidding themselves in thinking that our presence hasn’t had a deterrent effect on that region all these years? Why are we still doing the same old, same old with respect to “nuclear negotiations?”
While many may cringe at the thought, the time has come for swift action and you know as well as I know that the only military superpower that exists today in the US. Swift and soon.

Arcane said,

February 11, 2010 @ 4:07 am

South Korea’s 2.8 percent is higher than most of the US’s allies, including Canada, Japan, Mexico, the Philippines, Germany, the UK, and Taiwan. (Japan is the only one with a built-in excuse.)

Hmmm, last I checked none of these countries are bordering North Korea, which, in case you didn’t know, has the 4th largest military on the planet. The closest comparison is Taiwan, and it has the defensive benefit of being an island. There is no question, however, that these nations are taking advantage of the American umbrella and are failing to spend enough for their defense.

And this percentage rate is not counting the opportunity costs of subjecting most of the males in the country to an average of two to two-and-a-half years of mandatory military service during some of their most productive years. Those men are paid far less than the comparative rate they would get in the United States, which also cuts down on the monetary amount, but it does come at a significant cost.

Many nations in the Western world still have conscription with very little “opportunity costs,” as you so put it. But this goes to show that the South Korean military is even weaker than one thinks, since they have to spend a massive amount of money from an already small budget to train personnel who will only be useful for a short period of time thereafter. South Korea should fully professionalize its military.

The idea that “South Korea doesn’t take its own defense seriously” is a fiction. Besides, South Korea as of late (i.e., under Lee) has been expanding its cooperative role with the US outside the Peninsula, and that should also count for something.

Yes, Lee has been an improvement over the previous two administrations.
But he still has a long ways to go.

I think the investment focus the ROK has on high tech, such as AEGIS, F-15K, K2, and K21 IFV at the expense manpower, training, and short range transport shows that the ROK doesn’t take its defense seriously.

I actually think these programs should be applauded, however most South Korean military modernization and acquisition programs have been cancelled in the past few years, and much of the equipment they operate is aging and falling apart.

While many may cringe at the thought, the time has come for swift action and you know as well as I know that the only military superpower that exists today in the US.

Military action against North Korea? Horrible idea unless otherwise provoked.

KCJ said,

February 11, 2010 @ 4:32 am

A couple factual corrections. ROK conscripts serve for 26 months and get paid about 100,000 Won ($90 USD) per month. I would agree that ROK professional officers and NCOs are underpaid and worked very hard.

MrChips said,

February 12, 2010 @ 4:31 am

I’d like to correct KCJ’s factual corrections. ROK conscripts DO NOT serve 26 months; they serve 22 months by law passed in 2005. They haven’t served 26 months since 2005 when the 2020 Reform Bill was passed. That change to service requirement was preserved in the National Defense Reform Act of 2006. So the requirement remains 22 months and will reduce by 1 month each year through 2014 when it will be 18 months. I know that because I converse with manpower on a weekly basis. For your conscript obligation check out the 2008 defense white paper covering 2020 reform. You’ll need to download the bada reader to view those. Or if you prefer…

http://www.mnd.go.kr/mndEng_2009/DefensePolicy/Whitepaper/index.jsp

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ks.html

or, http://www.rand.org/commentary/2010/01/21/KH.html

As for the monetary compensation, the ROK Army guys I work with would like to know where the other 80,000 won is going. They’re still getting 20. Sorry I can’t find documentation on that only hearsay but I’ll tend towards the horse’s mouth.

RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI

Leave a Comment