North Korea Publicly Executes Clandestine Citizen Journalist

25 Responses

• Comments 0
• Pingbacks 0

1. Although I don’t agree necessarily with your sentiment in the final paragraph, I’m deeply disturbed and saddened by this. At least we know his work wasn’t in vain, people like him are true heroes. RIP.

2. Josh:

   To put things in perspective (and anyone feel free to correct me if I’m way out there on this one), I’ve read that like 200K North Koreans may be in the gulags at present. I’ve also read that life expectancy there is pretty short. If we assume there are 200K North Koreans in the gulags and that 1/5 die every year, that’s over 40K dying per year just due to political persecution. That’s over 100 per day. This is not counting people who starve to death or kill themselves on the outside of the gulags or the millions whose lives are wrecked through malnutrition (serious malnutrition prevents proper brain formation–even after reunification, you’ll have a legacy of half a country of underfed midgets with all sorts of health problems).

   It’s an unmitigated tragedy that seems to be getting worse.

   A martyr is useful to focus us, but we mustn’t lose sight of what they’re dying for… We talk so much about individual lives (i.e., speculating about a couple of defectors in China who may be discovered), but if a few weeks or months could be shaved off the life of the dictatorship (and the time it will allow for aid to come), we could be saving thousands of lives… (even a low percentage shot at this, i.e. 1-2% could be worth self-sacrifice).

3. I would be interested to hear whether Daily NK is posting antything about this and indeed, whether this journalist is part of their gang. Time will tell.

   Ban Ki Moon is an unmitigated disaster by the way (!), so he’s never gonna say/do anything. They might as well disband the UN and flush it down ‘to the relevant organ’ ie the dumpster.

   In one respect, NK resembles Western Societies is that people who stick their neck out, always get punished ie this journalist. Same thing in the west albeit a different context, but surely the tax man / social pressures / pc brigade / politicians all gang up to make sure you keep your mouth shut and keep in line.

4. Dan, What part do you deny? That the right to bear arms is the only hope of people who are denied every other right? In which case, pray that your brave ancestors who died in 1798 and 1916 didn’t hear you. Or that the U.N. really is an effective international insitution? Or that Ban Ki Moon cares about North Koreans? Or that Korea will have good reason to remember him fondly? If North Koreans don’t resist and overthrow this regime, explain to me how exactly this comes to an end.

5. If it’s up to the tree-hugging-brigade, NK will never come to an end, so it’s best if the local peeps or likely the military use whatever force necessary to shoot Kim and his puppet clique to another dimension ie a graveyard.

   Perfectly normal in an Asian context, it’s just us muppets in the west thinking we better ask Ban Ki Loony first.

6. By “tree-hugging-brigade” you must mean the South Koreans, the Chinese, the Russians, the Americans, and probably the Japanese? No one in power wants to see the NK regime fall, due to the disruption of the status quo that will obviously follow. Dragging left/right politics into this shows a deep misunderstanding of the situation and the players involved.

   Same goes for “drum circles”…and the last parting line seems a little tacked on. Only the freedom to own firearms will free the North Koreans? Good luck getting that one through the Supreme People’s Assembly. I think that an implosion of the Kim dynasty and abandonment of Juche followed by a military junta and slow reintegration into the world is the most likely process towards freedom…and it’s a long process.

   Great blog though, I check it at least 3 times a week.

7. This is bat-shit silly, Ernst: In one respect, NK resembles Western Societies is that people who stick their neck out, always get punished ie this journalist. Same thing in the west albeit a different context, but surely the tax man / social pressures / pc brigade / politicians all gang up to make sure you keep your mouth shut and keep in line.

8. “No drum circle or non-binding resolution is going to help the people of North Korea do that. Only the fundamental human right to bear arms will.”

   This is my favorite sentence. Except I would add prayer.

9. My qualm about arming the populace for an uprising is what will happen after the regime collapses. For a short-term aim that may end up happening on its own, would we be creating a long-term problem of a lawless “wild, wild west” up north that would lead to gangster tyranny, even infecting the south after reunification casts off the border separating the two.

   I’m saying that not in opposition to your idea, about which I can see parallels with valid historical reasons behind the Second Amendment, but just because the long-term and unanticipated consequences need to be considered as well. An armed thuggery, post-collapse, could be as bad for innocent citizens in some parts of North Korea as the regime is now.

   That’s my concern. I do see how the populace being armed alters the tipping point calculus I mentioned before in favor of ending the regime more quickly — maybe a lot more quickly — but I also see a post-collapse world of local and national assassinations, roving bands of local thugs stealing from those who have something they want, and an armed population that causes government agencies and NGO to have to proceed very slowly — if they can proceed at all — as they try to bring services and jobs to each local region.

   How can we put weapons in the hands of the people in a way that that won’t happen after the collapse? I’m asking, not making a rhetorical statement that we cannot.

   At any rate, my heart and my prayers go out to Mr Chong and his family.

10. Okay, I feel I should emphasize that the first and most important thing I felt when I read this post is a deep sense of sadness for this poor brave individual who sacrificed his life for his fellow oppressed brothers. What I’m about to elaborate upon is secondary to that and above all I thank you, Mr Stanton, for bringing this story to us.

    To clarify, I referred to your very final point, being that “[o]nly the fundamental human right to bear arms will [help the people of North Korea alter or abolish their government].” First of all, let me acknowledge the point you make regarding my own nation’s history in relation to the issue of the violent overthrow of oppressive regimes; it’s interesting that you bring it up and, indeed, it is something which does come to my mind regularly when I enter into debates like this: an ancestor of mine was in fact among the leaders of the 1798 rebellion you mention and I’ll admit that my family was known to be quite deeply involved in the Anglo-Irish conflict until the mid-20th century. To do your point justice I will concede that despite my ideological commitment to non-violence, I have reaped the benefits of their often-violent struggle against colonial rule over my country, and I am quietly glad they succeeded.

    Now, the challenge is to express myself coherently and briefly on something of a complex issue. Here goes. As I noted above, it’s not that I don’t understand the concept of righteous violence, and — like most people — it’s not as if I’ve never derived a guilty satisfaction from it. Who didn’t enjoy the Ceausescu moment? And as I mentioned above, in the context of Ireland I’ll admit that when I think of the troubles, and the civil rights movement, I initially lose no sleep over any soldier or RUC man who lost his life in defence of oppression. Where I draw the line is the targeting of civilians or non-combatants, or just as bad, their being considered “collateral damage” by external forces. However, upon further reflection and as I deepen my search for a coherent moral basis, I cannot escape the truth that whether someone is a combatant or otherwise, every single killing steals a father from a daughter, a husband from a wife, a brother from his siblings and so forth. I am not a Christian but no matter how much I or any of us may excuse murder in the name of self defence, there are four words which just won’t leave me alone about this: thou shalt not kill. I do not believe them to be open to interpretation.

    Moving more specifically to the North Korean context and out of the extended tangent, you ask me to explain how exactly the atrocities in the DPRK will end “if the North Koreans don’t resist and overthrow this regime”. First of all, I wonder how on Earth you got the idea that I don’t want the North Koreans to do the above. Was there something in my brief comment which suggested that I want them to continue suffering? I certainly hope not. What I mean to say in any case is that I don’t want to believe that violent civil war is the only way to overthrow the Kim dynasty: bloodshed is not the only way to overthrow an oppressive regime. I know that the contexts are different, but that isn’t how it happened in Czechoslovakia, nor Poland, etc. It happened in those countries through the establishment of well-organised dissident movements, through the infiltration of alternative ideological resources and their presentation to the compliant masses: through communicative action.
    Further, I think that DPB makes a valid point — I don’t think the DPRK are going to be implementing the right to bear arms at any time in the near future, and I would imagine that smuggling weapons into that country may prove somewhat difficult. However, as you’ve mentioned before, the provision of communicative technologies such as mobile phones, along with a constant supply of other kinds of emancipatory ideological resources, be it texts from the Bible, Qu’ran, Vaclav Havel or George Orwell, by whatever means, have the power to wake these people up.

    Fundamentally, atrocious regimes such as that of the DPRK exist as much in the minds of their citizens as in their laws and various oppressive aparati. Oppression is perpetuated through a pandemic fear of the ‘Other’ and subsequent fear of expression, fear of communication and the possible consequences thereof. Perhaps I am young, naïve, idealistic, a tree hugging hippie, whatever, but I believe that defeating this fear and the fostering of solidarity among the suffering people of North Korea — be it achieved through the spread of Protestantism or Anarcho-feminism — would see the end of this regime without bloodshed. All those laws, those palaces, those camps can be burned to the ground if the people would just strike the matches.

    Well, there’s my long and rambling two cents, since you asked. I’ll elaborate upon this more coherently on my own blog at the weekend I hope, although the wider issue here is one which causes much friction within my own moral machinery I must admit — so I don’t imagine I’ll write anything conclusive — but I won’t make any excuses for that. We all know how bad things can get when people unconditionally align themselves with any ideology.

11. I’ve just noticed that kushibo has also, as usual, made some very interesting and practical assertions above too.

12. If an oppressor has nuclear weapons, do the oppressed have a fundamental right to nuclear weapons?

13. Dan, for all your talk of the loss of war, you’ve failed to address how it’s deadlier or more tragic than the “peace” in which North Koreans outside Pyongyang live now.

    I take issue with the idea that accidental death in wartime — which happened quite frequently when the civilized world fought to destroy Nazism, after all — is morally equivalent to the intentional targeting of noncombatant civilians. That is terrorism, and I would never advocate that. By this blurring of moral distinctions, you create a standard by which even self-defense inevitably becomes unjust. Extend this further and the laws of war bind only those unwilling to ignore them. But that’s not far from where we find ourselves now.

    Interesting history about your ancestor. Was he one of those remembered in the song, “Boulavogue?” I know plenty of those 1798 rebel songs — The Minstrel Boy, The Rising of the Moon, the Men of the West, Kevin Barry — by heart. They’re great songs, sung by people fighting for a righteous cause. I wonder what Cloney’s ancestor would do if he found himself oppressed, starved, and humiliated by an unaccountable tyranny. It’s a hard thing to understand if you’ve always been free and well fed.

14. If an oppressor has nuclear weapons, do the oppressed have a fundamental right to nuclear weapons?

    Umm, no. And since I suppose you’re about to ask, I don’t think they have a fundamental right to aircraft carriers or Roman siege engines, either.

15. Roman siege engines? They’d be a complete surprise to the oppressor. If the oppressed have a tactical need for them, I say they have the right.

16. Kushibo:

    Gonna apologize in advance here. But, I read your post again and you really lost me with the “armed thuggery”. You’re worried about roving bands of local thugs post Kim? What planet is this? First of all, I think all the arming talk is rhetorical (where would the guns come from?)… but really..”wild wild west”? How about evil, despotic east? China and/or S. Korea could easily handle roaming thugs… how is that worse than a concentrated evil systematically killing/starving people with nukes at its disposal? I don’t get it… “gangster tyranny infecting the south”… time will tell.. but that saying will make me smile tonight, though… gotta enjoy the funny where you can… I’d trade it in a second over the status quo….

17. I’ll answer more later, but I’m talking North Korean turning into northern Mexico.

18. Does the fundamental human right to bear arms include shoulder-fired surface-to-air missiles? In case an oppressor has helicopters. How about land mines and improvised explosive devices, against an oppresser with armored vehicles?

19. To the extent the helicopters and armored vehicles are used to kill the civilian population, or deny them their fundamental right to govern themselves, yes.

20. If the North Korean people begin an armed struggle against their own government or against Chinese fraternal volunteer peace-keepers, we should supply them with whatever they need, short of nuclear weapons and aircraft carriers. Because I think you’ll agree with me that, if the oppressed have a tactical need for Roman siege engines, which are stealthy and unexpected, there is no moral prohibition against them.

21. Dan, for all your talk of the loss of war, you’ve failed to address how it’s deadlier or more tragic than the “peace” in which North Koreans outside Pyongyang live now.

    This is a very good point. Please don’t misunderstand me, if the people of the DPRK were to start an armed uprising against their government, I could never condemn that, ever.

    As regards civilian deaths, I appreciate the point you make regarding the second world war and the difference in intention which exists between deliberate targeting of civilians, and writing them off as accidental. The problem, though, is that does also set a precedent which is often exploited, usually in prolonged conflicts — I think the Middle East or Colombia could provide a couple of useful examples of this — as both sides of the conflict dress up the issue of civilian deaths in whichever discourse suits them, eventually it is principally the non-combatant civilians who suffer, while the warring elites continue to go about their business, safe in the knowledge that it’s all for a greater cause.

    To get back to the Korean context, the main point I wanted to make in my second comment is that I just don’t think that armed conflict is *the only* way to overthrow the dynasty and, with respect, I didn’t think you did either until this post. Were the references to the manner in which the Czechs, Slovaks and Poles broke free from oppression so ridiculous as not to merit comment?

    Finally, I’d like to address your last point:
    I wonder what Cloney’s ancestor would do if he found himself oppressed, starved, and humiliated by an unaccountable tyranny. It’s a hard thing to understand if you’ve always been free and well fed.

    Again, very well put. It is a question I pose to myself regularly. I know, like many others here, I am absolutely blessed to have been “free and well fed” my entire short life. It’s as a result of this knowledge that I hope to dedicate myself to the emancipation of our less fortunate brothers and sisters for as long as I can, in whatever way I can — but ideally without ever involving myself in violence. I know I speak from a rather comfortable position saying that, and who knows, the harsh realities of the suffering in the world may yet change my position on it. Or maybe they won’t.

    By the way, it’s a long time since I listened to those songs you mention, though I do remember learning them at school — 1798 is a point of pride among many in my county in particular — so I’m not sure if he’s mentioned in “Boolavogue”. I’m impressed by your knowledge, though, and I’m curious as to whether it springs from some ancestral link to Ireland?

22. Dan, I didn’t discuss the various nonviolent options for removing this violent regime because if it’s not plausible, it’s not an option. It recently occurred to one guy to walk into North Korea to submit a petition to Kim Jong Il (let’s cross that one off our lists). Or maybe we could sue in the International Criminal Court? Or stick flowers in all of their gun barrels? Or declare a global day of transcendental meditation? Or wait for Ban Ki Moon to issue a posthumous apology to all of the dead he didn’t raise one useful peep to save, while the ChiComs were busy raping North Korean refugee women and the UNHCR stood by and watched in silence?

    I suppose some may be tempted to hope for something like what swept China in 1989 or Burma in 2008. But that would meet with the same kind of slaughter, and today, neither China nor Burma is on course toward becoming a representative, accountable form of government that serves its people first and itself second. On the contrary, both regimes feel more emboldened than ever that no foreign power will enable the oppressed to resist. If you can think of a non-violent way to remove the Kim Dynasty, I’d like to hear it.

    For what it’s worth, it might not ever be necessary to supply arms. The arms are already there, guarded by officers and NCO’s whose financial needs are greater than their morale or their loyalty. But that part comes later.

    Initially, overthrowing the regime begins with enabling North Koreans to organize and propagate a unifying ideology — meaning broadcasting, cell phones, satellite phones, and other means to move information. Above all, the organization would need money. With money, they could buy food and medicine, bribe border guards and truck drivers, and distribute it to people who need it. They could also coopt those parts of the regime’s infrastructure that still work, such as trained doctors and nurses who want to treat patient but don’t have the medicine to do it. They could bribe police officials while they establish their organization in the villages and towns. Only then would it be feasible to start obtaining arms from corruptible officers and NCO’s in the police, army units, and local militia. The people who receive food and medicine from the organization would be its eyes and ears, and would hide its supplies and caches.

    My degree of Irish ancestry by blood is very small, but much of America’s political ideology is either directly descended from or a sibling of the Irish rebellion of 1798. That’s an event of immense significance to our own revolution, and although few of us realize it, those old songs have great appeal to us for that reason.

23. I predict that “Chong” will merit no word of mention from Ban Ki Moon, and certainly won’t become a cause celebre to the Human Rights Industry to a fraction of the degree that Khalid Sheikh Mohammad and Moazzam Beg have.

    Begg appears to have severed his and Cage Prisoners’ links with AI, in a burst of self-pity and smears and likening himself to Nelson Mandela:

    http://www.cageprisoners.com/articles.php?id=31061

    I’m with Gita Sahgal. The ex jure nature of Begg’s detention was worrying… not least because it has allowed him to escape legitimate questions of just why he seems to have seen more front line action than many British Riflemen… but it does not follow that I would have appointed him as a spokesman and allowed him ti read his poetry at AI events.

    AI protested against David Irving’s conviction for Holocaust Denial in Austria (and, I assume, Ernst Zundal’s in Germany), but didn’t make them spokesmen.

24. I don’t want to flog a dead horse here, but I’d felt bad for not replying since I’ve been busy lately. Just a couple of things and I’ll leave it at that.

    It recently occurred to one guy to walk into North Korea to submit a petition to Kim Jong Il (let’s cross that one off our lists). Or maybe we could sue in the International Criminal Court? Or stick flowers in all of their gun barrels? Or declare a global day of transcendental meditation? Or wait for Ban Ki Moon to issue a posthumous apology to all of the dead he didn’t raise one useful peep to save, while the ChiComs were busy raping North Korean refugee women and the UNHCR stood by and watched in silence?

    Okay, I didn’t suggest any of these things. I only pointed, while aware of the differences that exist, to successful campaigns of (largely) non violent resistance to totalitarian rule. Maybe I’m wrong but I feel this is a veiled accusation of “hippyness”, which I find a bit cynical. Then again, I’m sure the same criticisms were thrown at the likes of Havel and his followers.

    Your points about China and Burma are good ones, I accept that they are both disheartening examples. As I’ve said before, I wouldn’t lose sleep at night over the Chinese or Burmese or (obviously) North Korean military machines coming under attack from within.

    Anyway, the scenario you describe in your penultimate paragraph sounds ideal: what you describe is the widespread and extensive societal penetration of a well-organised dissident movement. I feel that such a movement may in and of itself do such damage to the Juche ideology — by its mere existence and all the processes you describe above — as to greatly diminish the need for the use of violence in any case (depending on how widespread and extensive its reach becomes). Then again, yes, I know, that’s not what happened in China or Burma, but it is what happened in Europe.

25. I think you betray the weakness of your argument by comparing Gustav Husak to Kim Jong Il. There were limits to how far Husak was willing to crush his opposition. Now give me an example of a regime like North Korea’s that was overthrown nonviolently. Explain to me some plausible way that can happen.

    For the record, I never called you a hippie, and I sure as hell hope you aren’t one, because I like you, and I really, really hate hippies.