Should Hanchongryon Be Designated a Terrorist Organization?
“Let us eliminate anti-unification pro-war forces which intend to cast fire clouds of a nuclear war on the heads of Koreans.
— Hanchongryon Statement before visiting Pyongyang
If I’d had any idea that things were this bad on South Korean university campuses, I’d have been paying much closer attention:
Seven Korea University students face disciplinary punishment after illegally detaining nine professors for 16 hours. The Yonsei University president is working elsewhere after being driven out of his office some 40 days ago by radical students who are occupying the university administrative building. Some 50 pro-North Korea students of Joong-Ang University also occupied the president’s office and painted walls and floor with slogans.
Amazing. Like “1984” meets “Lord of the Flies.” This is the infamous North Korean fifth column known as Hanchongryon, with a long history of violence and almost always featured in our force protection warnings about violent demonstrations. More on that later. But this story ends well:
In response, other students put up banners which read “No More Violence” on campus and met to denounce the occupation.
Now, local student council organizations at Dongguk and Seoul National Universities are pulling out of Hanchongryon, causing them a significant loss of funding, and more universities may follow. Others, notably Ewha, left years ago. What’s more, there’s a backlash against Hanchongryon’s most reprehensible ideas:
[The head of the SNU students’ assocation] stated, “Because of such organizations’ anti-American and anti-capitalistic monopoly demonstrations, various opinions from students have been ignored. I acknowledge that student movements have contributed to the democratization of Korean society, but there have been a number of side effects since Korea realized democratization.
In the statement, the student council said, “Student council dues that should be spent for the welfare of students have been used for the political organizations. Students have been demoted to the objects of such organizations.
I certainly hope that the red guards’ excesses will be enough to provoke a remedy in the electoral process, but with this kind of prosecutorial incomptence, you have to wonder if the legal system is up to the task (don’t blame the courts, however, for dismissing charges based on flimsy evidence).
Even today, there is fresh evidence of North Korean infuence over Hanchongryon, and of the government’s fear of reigning them in. That said, I continue to oppose using the military to enforce domestic laws against civilians. There is nothing here that can’t be done by competent and determined law enforcement and prosecution. Nor would I necessarily deny them permission to visit the North, though I’d want them searched on the way home and watched carefully thereafter. My main concern is not their words or deeds, but their actions.
Korea will have to protect the rule of law in its own society, but what if we have evidence that these punks hurt one of our soldiers? Here is how U.S. law defines terrorism, as found here, in Title 18 of the United States Code:
Section 2331. Definitions
As used in this chapter –
(1) the term ”international terrorism” means activities that
–
(A) involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that
are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of
any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed
within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended –
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by
intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass
destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
(C) occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of
the United States, or transcend national boundaries in terms of
the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they
appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which
their perpetrators operate or seek asylum;
I can certainly make the argument that Hanchongryon’s activities meet that definition, and I’d lay even money that Hanchongryon was responsible for some of these incidents. The Korean authorities have seldom fully investigated or prosecuted acts of violence against U.S. soldiers. If the Koreans don’t act, why can’t we?
Consider the power of Section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act to designate Hanchongryon as an entity of special money laundering concern (virtually any possession, handling, or movement of terrorist funds is money laundering under 18 U.S.C. sec. 1960). Best of all, Section 311 has extraterritorial application, as our sanctions against Banco Delta illustrate. It can reach the assets of terrorist organizations anywhere.
This could bankrupt Hanchongryon overnight. It’s a legal, nonviolent way to protect our troops from the violent citizens of an “ally” that won’t protect them.
—–