Freedom House III: Q&A with Sharansky, Kang Chol-Hwan, and Sen. Sam Brownback
This was a Q&A session moderated by Senator Sam Brownback, who can fairly be called North Korea’s most dangerous enemy in the U.S. Congress. Update: After watching this program on C-SPAN’s book TV, I caught a few errors and made corrections to that effect. Please do not mistake this for a verbatim transcript; it’s highly summarized . . . my best effort to be faithful to the ideas conveyed by the speakers. In the case of Mr. Sharansky, I cleaned up many heavily accented sentence fragments to form complete, concise sentences. In the case of Mr. Kang, I cleaned up many phrases that sounded awkward after being translated.
Q (Brownback to Sharansky). Tell us your impressions on reading The Aquariums of Pyongyang.
A. Although we speak of different languages and cultures, the methods of terror are the same, and thus, the methods of getting rid of the regimes are the same [something I can’t exactly agree with–Sharansky’s very existence proves that the methods of terror really weren’t the same; passive resistance, dissent, and other bloodless methods simply aren’t options in North Korea today, nor ore they likely to be anytime soon]. We must stop appeasing dictators and force them to adjust to our philosophy [applause].
Q [it was for Kang, but I missed it].
It was a great honor recently to interview the President of the United States. When I escaped North Korea, I had a dream that I could be the voice of the North Korean people. In this, I received no help from the South Korean government. They never did anything to help me. They did not even participate in the three U.N. resolutions condemning North Korea’s human rights abuses. They are like Lee Won-Yong [phonetic] who sold Korea to Japan [OFK: I can’t overstate the explosiveness of this comparison for most Koreans]. I have read Natan Sharansky’s book [the Korean edition was just released]. Those living in terror regimes must have courage in their hearts. Those in free societies must exercise moral discernment. The Sunshine Policy has produced nothing after eight years. North Korea still commits eggregious human rights violations, and continues to build nuclear weapons. It is time to correct it. I respect activists who fought for democracy in South Korea, activists like Kim Min-Soo.* Thank you for fighting for human rights in North Korea.
[* Kim Min-Soo is a GNP member of the Korean National Assembly who spent three years in prison for pro-democracy activities as a labor leader in the 1980s. He attended and addressed the Freedom House conference and is now an activist for human rights in North Korea. Regrettably, I had to decline an invitation to dinner with him because I’m supposed to be on leave, and my family needs to see more of me these days.]
Q (by Brownback, for Sharansky). What did dissidents do to bring down the Soviet regime?
A. We were in a constant struggle with them. We got no news from the outside, but we could tell what effect we were having because of the KGB questions, and the care they took to bring me back from death during my hunger strikes. Our greatest day was when Ronald Reagan called the Soviet Union an “evil empire.” We were knocking on the walls to communicate the message to each other. I also remember that Ronald Reagan said that he was not interested in friendship with the Soviet Union. Finally, someone was speaking the truth. Finally, someone had shown moral clarity.
Q. Are we speaking with sufficient clarity on North Korea?
A. Well, you must say that if these things are going on . . . we are not. The policy thus far has been mostly appeasement. We have taken the position that we have to deal with the nuclear issues first. Even the policy of South Korea has lacked moral clarity. A strong moral position is best for us, and best for the world.
Q. And for the North Korean people?
A. No doubt. It’s what the North Korean people need. It is racism to believe that there are people who like to be tortured (applause).
Q (for Kang). Can you give us one story or vignette that summarizes your experience in North Korea?
A. [Kang never really responded, but instead related:] I was sent to prison [at age nine] because of some offense by my grandfather. Because he was my grandfather, I was considered guilty by association. In the gulags, there are two levels of security–“controlled” areas [from which no one ever leaves], and “revolutionary” areas, such as the one where we were. North Korea’s gulags serve two purposes–controlling opposition, and getting work from people. Hitler had his Auschwitz with its gas chambers for mass extermination, North Korea doesn’t have such gas chambers.* But in the gulags, many people have been executed . . . perhaps 200,000 to 300,000 people. In the 21st Century, we are still witnessing such gulags as those run by the Nazi Hitler.
[* Obviously, there have been reports of gas chambers in North Korea. Congress may soon hold hearings on this very question. Did Kang mean to suggest that the reports are false, or that the North Korean gas chambers simply don’t match the scale of those in the Nazi camps. Indeed, the evidence is that they operate on a far, far smaller scale. I will see if I can clarify this.]
Q. What are the most effective things we can advocate to bring change to North Korea?
A. The North Korean regime is using its nuclear weapons as a form of blackmail. The nuclear focus keeps us from getting to the heart of the issue, the nature of the North Korean regime. Our aid to North Korea should be conditioned on improving human rights conditions there.
Q (for Sharansky). This is being broadcast live into North Korea, where it’s the middle of the night, and we hope that the guards may be less alert. I want to recognize Ambassador Mark Palmer, who was the force behind the ADVANCE Democracy Act [my first-hand report of its announcement here], is now working on a bill that would create zero tolerance for dictatorships [raising obvious questions of specifics; there was also a brief colloquy in which Amb. Palmer said that there are 45 dictatorships left on earth]. We have learned that we should not negotiate with evil, but that instead, we should confront it. What can we do in that regard?
A. When I met with President Bush, he asked me for the most important single piece of advice I could give him. That was difficult for me, because there were many pieces of advice I could give, but the one that considered most important was to speak with the dissidents and show everyone whose side Americans are on. This is true whether we are talking about Iraq, Iran, Syria, or North Korea. We would not have one million Lebanese demonstrating, or 4,000 Egyptian judges sending petitions to President Mubarak unless we had done this. President Bush’s meeting with Kang Chol-Hwan may have been a factor–maybe the reason–the North Koreans suddenly to negotiate again [OFK: another example of great minds thinking alike]. We must encourage double-thinkers to become dissidents. As with Helsinki, we should link human rights to our code of ethics for engagement. We still don’t have this code of ethics for our trade and negotiations with dictatorships.
Q. We have heard reports that up to 2 million people have starved to death in North Korea. Would you call what has happened in North Korea a genocide?
A. The thing that comes to mind is what Stalin did in the Ukraine in the 1930’s, when he decided to reduce the Ukrainian population and deliberately starved millions of people to death there. With a regime that hates its own people this way, I would not be surprised [my own thoughts on the question here]. We must also be critical of the nations that support these acts. China, which repatriates North Koreans–maybe 100,000 of them–back to these conditions, says that it has no room for these people. China has what–a billion people? And it claims not to have room for 100,000 North Koreans? This is nothing but a demographic pretext. These people are being sent back to certain death.
Q. Should we call it a genocide?
A. Yes, but it’s not enough to call it a genocide. We must treat it as one [applause].
Q (to Kang). Many in America tend to believe that North Koreans are brainwashed and support Kim Jong Il [then contrasting that view with a quotation from a defector, claiming that North Koreans despise Kim Jong Il]. Is that true, that North Koreans no longer look up to Kim Jong-Il?
A. It is true. There is a part in Sharansky’s book where he talks about people who live in terror societies, who believe one thing inside but behave a different way in public. Those people will appear to support the regime from the outside until it is safe for them to be more honest. When the terror is lifted, criticism can emerge into the open.
Q. How can we communicate with them?
A. One way is to do so through China. Some may believe that China is an ally of North Korea, but China is also a grave threat, because in North Korea, the wind of freedom blows from China. Through China, North Koreans can see South Korean soap operas and get access to foreign ideas and learn how people on the outside live. Another way is through broadcasting, such as by KBS or Radio Free Asia. Another thing we can do is to drop more radios to the people.