Hello everyone!
My name is Angie Liao. I am a rising junior at Gallatin studying Human Rights Law & Human Expression. This summer, I am looking to examine the relationship between the U.S. and North Korea, specifically alternative policy strategies to engage stronger human rights protections in North Korea. Last summer while doing research in Beijing, I noticed that an overwhelming portion of diplomatic discourse around North Korea focuses solely on the nuclear issue, allowing human rights concerns to consistently fall by the wayside. I hope to interrogate that norm this summer and in following semesters.
My research begins at the Committee for Human Rights in North Korea, an NGO in Washington, D.C., which is home for five weeks. I have been doing many, many events with HRNK since arriving in D.C. on June 1st. I am also completing some research and administrative work for the organization in conjunction with pursuing my own research, with the help of HRNK resources and the many other information sources in D.C. such as the Library of Congress.
I’ve had a chance to meet some incredible people while in D.C. Joseph Kim, who defected from North Korea as a teenager before attending high school and now college in the U.S., came and spoke at our Korea Club dinner, hosted in conjunction with D.C.’s Korea Economic Institute. Joseph was such an engaging speaker and friendly person, and everyone really enjoyed hearing him talk about his experiences. I highly recommend his new book Under the Same Sky: From Starvation in North Korea to Salvation in America.
One of the absolute best things I’ve gotten to do so far in D.C. was actually separate from HRNK. Two weeks ago, I was invited to the Women’s Foreign Policy Group’s 20th Anniversary Celebration event, an all-day conference featuring exclusively female speakers, with panels on topics ranging from crises in the Middle East to foreign policy in the social media age. While at the conference, I met so many incredibly engaging, intelligent, and inspirational women, including Indira Lakshmanan, whose articles on normalization of U.S.-Cuba relations I have been citing extensively in my research on U.S.-North Korea and U.S.-China relations.
Amid all this work, there has been a little play! The HRNK office has been hugely welcoming and warm to me. I’ve had some small chances to explore D.C. on my off time, and I’m also now in charge of the HRNK Instagram! If you have an Instagram I highly (and without bias…) recommend following us for updates on D.C. foreign policy events and HRNK goings-on.
Lastly, I’m very excited to announce that a new item has been added to my itinerary this summer. For two weeks in August I’ll be pit-stopping in Seoul to continue this research with the help of new contacts made at the WFPG conference, as well as taking a chance to explore the city and surrounding areas. I may even rendezvous with HRNK’s director whose Seoul trip overlaps with mine. I’m really excited to make this trip a reality and be able to take my research into the field in a sense.
I hope to do some vlogs from Seoul so look out for that towards the end of the summer.
Until next time!
Angie
Hi Angie,
It sounds like you’re having an enriching time in D.C. and getting to be involved in multiple conversations and communities which is great!
A few questions and maybe some broader things to think about, as you go forward in your process! Are you looking at the differences in the diplomatic discourse between rights in North Korea and the role of South Korea in the international community? As you wrote above, you got to hear from Joseph Kim, and so in this same vein, is there a surge in the United States for defectors to begin to share their stories? I would also be curious if those active in the diplomatic discourse regarding rights in North Korea are in large numbers defectors, and if South Koreans and women are represented in these discussions as well?
I have found in past conversations, and perhaps you have too, that when it comes to rights discourses, there is often a lot of comparison of violations by different governments and states, as well as historical comparisons. Do you think that this is a contributing factor to why the nuclear issue is focused on in regards to North Korea? This concept of a dominant narrative, even within the framework of a rights narrative, is an interesting one, and I think that we saw this in Sri Lanka as well.
I’m sure that these are all questions and topics that will continue to come up throughout the summer for you! Your trip to Seoul sounds amazing — I’m very jealous!
Best of luck,
Emily
Hey Emily,
Thanks for your questions!
1. Are you looking at the differences in the diplomatic discourse between rights in North Korea and the role of South Korea in the international community?
Hm, I’m not sure these two things are totally related. Do you mean the role/responsibility of South Korea as a member of the international community TO instill better rights in North Korea? If so, the difference between that and what? If you could clarify I think I could answer this question much bette!
2. As you wrote above, you got to hear from Joseph Kim, and so in this same vein, is there a surge in the United States for defectors to begin to share their stories?
Yes, absolutely. This summer several books other than Joseph Kim’s penned by North Korean defectors are being released. There is some critical discourse on the intentions and values behind sharing these stories, but they are definitely becoming more and more prevalent. Not only through publications, but also Ted Talks, public speeches, Congressional testimony, etc.
3. I would also be curious if those active in the diplomatic discourse regarding rights in North Korea are in large numbers defectors, and if South Koreans and women are represented in these discussions as well?
There are in general two waves, or generations, of North Korean defectors who have greatest presence in the United States and at least, in the public eye on North Korea and its defectors. One are an older generation who defected even before the War, such as Peter Kang, a really prevalent authority on North Korean issues in D.C. Others are those who defected around the time of the famine. Most of them did so as children and are around Joseph’s age. There are a lot of narrative factors in why these are the most prominent factors – I won’t get into it now, but those from the second wave are often still in school and so are not generally invited into the *diplomatic* discourse except as novelty guest speakers. In terms of policy, government-based discussions, etc., most North Korean defectors who are allowed access or large voice are from the older generation, and from my observation they mostly participate in the capacity of NGO founders or non-profit contributors.
South Koreans are actually more represented in official diplomatic discourses than North Koreans, just because more South Koreans have access to official political infrastructures and, of course, South Korea actually has diplomatic relations with the States and other great powers that are beginning to engage in the rights issues of North Korea (these also include China, Japan, etc., not just the States). However, this may actually be biasing the conversation, again, even further towards focus on the nuclear issues over rights issues. Most North Koreans have observed a certain apathy in South Korea (particularly in the younger generation) on the issue of human rights for North Koreans, because there is still a great deal of stigma in South Korean society regarding North Koreans. Joseph experienced this a lot while he was there and has been very vocal about it, among several other younger defectors who are now sharing their stories. South Korean society is much likelier to speak loudly about the nuclear problem because it is a huge, immediate problem directly affecting them.
4. I have found in past conversations, and perhaps you have too, that when it comes to rights discourses, there is often a lot of comparison of violations by different governments and states, as well as historical comparisons. Do you think that this is a contributing factor to why the nuclear issue is focused on in regards to North Korea?
I am not entirely sure I understand this question either. Would the contributing factor be that by comparison, rights violations happening in North Korea are not as bad as those inflicted by other governments or by regimes in history, and so diplomats can rationalize ignoring the rights issues?
I would say that it should actually be the opposite. Rights violations in North Korea appear with heavy dramatics and scare tactics in media pretty frequently, so I don’t think it’s very arguable that people are shelving the topic because they feel comfortable that North Korea isn’t all that bad. The line thrown around diplomats and experts a lot is that North Korea is the only regime today that is so oppressive and there is no other like it. I mean, i actually think this can be questioned a little bit (Eritrea???), but I heard it so often in D.C. that I think the general consensus is that North Korea is a huge human rights anomaly and thus a problem.
I think the issue is more the persistent and obviously false rationalization that human rights issues can be targeted through the nuclear issue, or worse, that to focus on human rights issues would irreparably damage negotiations on the nuclear issue. This is a really flawed viewpoint because right now there ARE no negotiations happening on the nuclear issue. Six Party Talks are basically defunct – how much more harm can be done? The idea that human rights issues are too hot to touch in the dominant nuclear scheme plays right into the Kim regime’s hands, and it tries too heavy-handedly to transpose other international nuclear situations, most notably Iran, directly onto the North Korean context, which is actually totally different from Iran. This is the same mistake that has led to INKSNA and imposing countless ineffective sanctions on North Korea as a farce of real action or defense of international human rights standards. North Korea doesn’t respond to sanctions at all in the same way as Iran, and it also has a nuclear situation that is extremely fragile but in a totally different way than Iran’s.