North Korea Gets Another Free Chip
While we don’t know any of the details, and so my resigned sigh might turn out to have been unfair, I cannot say it surprised me this morning to learn that there are still American citizens capable of getting themselves arrested in and around North Korea despite this, this and this, not to mention this, and it will surprise me even less should I find that the North Koreans use it as a way to try and undercut the ongoing U.S.-South Korean official policy of skepticism as to Pyongyang’s motivations.
On the bright side, while the probability is that this individual will spend a few months in jail, he or she may get lucky; after all, the last one, Aijalon Gomes, was rescued by Jimmy Carter, and he has already booked his ticket…
As an aside, I’d just like to point out that when General Walter Sharp and I last competed on the running track (Yongsan Army Base 5km, quite the event let me tell you) I beat him hands down. I’m not sure he knows, to be honest. Regardless, perhaps because he feels it is the only way to get through to some people, Gen. Sharp has been telling it like it is to the Senate Armed Services Committee;
McCain: Can you envision a scenario in which the North Korean regime is willing to give up its nuclear weapons capability?
Sharp: Sir, not without a whole bunch of pressure from, really, everyone around the globe. North Korea I think has clearly said that they are developing this nuclear capability, I think it is clear that Kim Jong Il believes he has to have it for regime survival; I don’t believe that to be true, but it will take people convincing him that the regime is not at risk. To answer your question directly, no, I don’t see it that he will give up his nuclear capability.
Can’t say he wasn’t clear.
Elsewhere, North Korea’s current domestic policy in the northern provinces seems to be taking shape as one of stopping the inflow of information come what may. Evidence that people found to have contacted the outside are being exiled internally is growing, the details of which can be found here, while the execution of people for economic crimes is, if true, not a good sign. In the breathless words of one North Korean source;
The politics of violence has become a reign of terror.
Meanwhile, it is often the relatively smaller things more than the big ones that make me think North Korea is a country fundamentally opposed to playing by the rules.
On the very much more positive side, I hope this website of anti-Kim cartoons has experienced an upsurge in hits of late, for it would be nothing less than its owner, and his collaborator, deserve.
CNN has just determined the sex of the detained American:
“Diplomatic sources speaking on condition of not being identified said the man is a Korean-American businessman. One of the sources said the businessman had a visa to enter North Korea.”
http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/04/12/north.korea.american/?hpt=T2
I guess this is not some knucklehead who crossed the river border from China.
Yes right, I also heard rumors of that this afternoon; if so, I take back my resigned sigh happily. Either way, let us hope that North Korea deal with him approprately, rather than turning him into a pawn.
The detained man has been identified as Jun Young Su. The smart money is on him being kyopo and a religious zealot, so we’ll have to wait and see.
Of course, if he’s someone whose business is ferrying refugees out of North Korea and China, I will abjectly apologize and donate a bunch of time and money to the cause. But for now, I’m going to go with what the trend has been: stupogants getting caught going into North Korea for their own selfish and/or messianic ends.
Bingo!(?) But it is the kind of predictable bingo that most people stand a good chance of winning, Kushibo, so don’t get too big-headed~
Rest assured, Chris, any big-headedness I get from predicting these things comes not from this but from when I was one of only a handful people who figured out what was likely going on with Laura Ling and Euna Lee getting nicked.
Having a visa to enter the country and not are two very different thing.
I cast a questionable eye on statements like Kushibos: You’ll fully back someone going into North Korea legally and then illegally helping North Koreans flee the country, but you’ll damn the same man if he is illegally spreading a religion…? Why so much hatred for one over the other?
I remember back to once sevearl years ago when a South Korean woman was arrested while on the Mt. Kumgang tour for suggesting that one of the North Korean tour guides should visit the South one day. That wasn’t exactly trying to convert the Nork to anything, but it was enough to get the Sork detained.
What about when those saints ferrying North Koreans to China are also devils trying to convert em?
Article by one of the guys who talked to the N. Koreans in Germany: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/north-koreas-six-party-trap/2011/04/14/AFD5t5eD_story.html
usinkorea wrote:
Setting aside for a moment that it is not hatred I feel but rather anger, I would submit that the predictable outcomes of ferrying people out versus entering and preachy proselytizing are at opposing poles. The former “saves” a life while the latter endangers it. While a Robert Park handing out Bibles and religious tracts is not directly killing the people he contacts, he is getting them killed or imprisoned, in a way that is necessary and sufficient cause.
Furthermore, what we have seen from the likes of Robert Park et al are people who are more concerned, at heart, with being messianic or mosaic than with actually helping people. Robert Park, for example, is either mentally ill and/or an attention whore of the worst sort.
That’s a pretty tangled sentenced and gets at my objections.
Don’t lump every Christian working within North Korea with Park.
What about Rev. Peters and the work he’s helped with with North Koreans hiding out in Manchuria – which I am sure extends into the North? Those people getting caught and sent back to North Korea suffer a worse fate for their connection with missionaries in China and the Christian church.
But, I’m not going to go further with this. —- Not that I find it too irritating — it’s just that someone who has great anger and forcefully says the Christian activists in North Korea “are more concerned, at heart, with being messianic or mosaic than with actually helping people” likely has a disdain for religion (at least evangelical Christianity) that makes going further likely being caught in a loop. Neither of us are likely to bend much here…
Oh. I forgot. Getting caught trying to flee North Korea comes with some bad reprecussions too…Getting caught with South Korean DVDs and such also not great for your family’s health…Being a Christian — well, will you add these others to the list of things that shouldn’t be done to or for the North Korean people along with spreading a religion? Should the South Korean government shut down the balloon launches too in order to save from harm North Koreans who get caught with the stuff in them?
kushibo boasts, correctly, that he “was one of only a handful people who figured out what was likely going on with Laura Ling and Euna Lee getting nicked.” But after we go to his second link and read his comment, we should also read Sonagi’s following comment, where she notes that “The Chinese government would wink at DPRK soldiers crossing the river …” because that’s what happened. The North Korean border guards chased the two women back into China and arrested them there.
usinkorea, after a difficult discussion with kushibo, I turn for solace to ‘The World Is Bigger Now: An American Journalist’s Release from Captivity in North Korea . . . A Remarkable Story of Faith, Family, and Forgiveness.’
I never ever did. I realize you think my sentences are too complicated for you to fully understand them, but this statement of yours is just simply mind-bogglingly ignorant.
When I have more time (it’s crunch time in grad school now), I’ll shower you with links showing you how utterly foolish your comment was. For now, though, I’ll point out the following:
1. Robert Park is by no means “every Christian.” Neither is Aijalon Gomes. Nor are Euna Lee or Laura Ling.
2. There is a Grand Canyon-sized difference between calculatedly risking lives for something that will likely save some of them (after all, all things come with risk) versus deliberately handing a propaganda victory, as well as political and actual capital, to the enemy, especially for your own glory.
3. Robert Park is mentally ill and needs to be saved from his own suicidal and messianic hijinks. Pointing that out is not bashing him, and it is certainly not bashing “every Christian.”
4. Don’t for a minute try to paint a picture of me as some sort of Christian basher with your above statement. As a Christian myself, I will speak up if the spirit wills it when I see people testing God or acting as a stumbling block.
usinkorea wrote:
Again, I spoke out against certain individuals and certain behaviors. The type of thing is very clear; I spoke out against Aijalon Gomes, for example, before he ever even went.
It is incredibly dishonest of you to take my statements and then suggest I am bashing all Christians. I certainly am not, and the body of writings I’ve produced here and on my own blog make that crystal clear.
Turn personally insulting. That will convince people…
Yeah. I’m sure a lot of brain dead ignorant readers will assume you are speaking way beyond Park with statements like that…
A Park and a Gomez do not a convincing trend make……especially when you have the likes of a Peters and other mostly-Christian-related NGOs working hark in Manchurian and reaching into North Korea to spread Christianity as well as ferry people out of the North.
Step back and look at what you have written.
In your rush to voice your anger at Park (and Gomez)- you have ended up condemning all the people working to spread Christianity in Korea.
There is no way to get around that without starting over. You can’t stick to what you’ve accomplished so far in this thread….
For example, the Park (as opposed to the stereotyping a Park) didn’t hand out a single Bible or tract inside North Korea – as far as I know – but was picked up immedaitely after crossing the border.
But, a lot of tracks and Bibles have been passed around clandestinely inside the North – by people you are clearly identifying with “a” Park.
And you are clearly condemning their whole project…
You don’t have to be smarter than a 5th grader to see that in what you have written — whether that was your intention or not…
Whoops. THIS ONE was a response to you.
And like I said here, if this turns out NOT to be Park- or Gomes-esque grandstanding or something messianic, I will happily retract my snark.
I said that the level of anger you were showing to the “a” Park types likely showed a disdain for religion or at least evangelical Christians. I’m sure you know there are more than a few Christians who show contempt for the evangelicals. I used to have some feelings like that since that was how education and pop culture trained me.
You went on to clarify this point somewhat by showing it wasn’t just about religion in general, but you reenforced the inference that your anger was not simply at Park (or Gomez) himself but to evangelicals working within and around North Korea.
The last quote above contradicts that completely.
But, it doesn’t mesh with the one before it…
I think in your disgust with Park your statements shot a bit too wide in your first shorter statement, then you doubled-down with a justification that might not coorespond with your actual, long-term feelings on the issue of what some Christian-related or centered groups are doing in NK and along the border…
The facts are – the trend among religious-minded activits seeking to do something about the North Korea situation is not represented by Park or the other guy. It should be correctly defined by those who are working below the radar to help North Koreans in terms of (as they see it) their eternal souls as well as their earthly life.
The last quote above is from someone I’d safely bet agress with that.
The 2nd to last quote sounds like someone I’d safely bet does not…
So tell me, usinkorea, what does your church think of Robert Park and Aijalon Gomes traipsing into North Korea?
In juxaposing the quotes offered, I do not mean to suggest I’m any more consistent long term. When you comment as much and for as long as I (or Kushibo) has, your bound to say things over time that don’t mesh well together……..It is blogging we’re dealing with…..
I might have a comment answering Kushibo’s question caught in the spam filter…
On the article posted by Some_Dude: Why have we all already not reached the consensus that denuclearizing the Korean peninsula is impossible given the north’s ability to build reactor sites theoretically anywhere and the pure and true ideological mistrust requiring that each side insist on full-access inspections without the desire to submit to them themselves? It’s such a moot point and I’m sick of even hearing about it with any tinge of seriousness.
Colin, recall that the Glans Plan for Korea says nothing about denuclearization:
1.PRC stays out.
2. ROK annexes DPRK.
3. USA gets out.
Colin,
“We” have, meaning that experts, military officials, South Korean conservatives and interested long-term observers have. Those Eberstadt comments are for the casual observer and the terminally short of thinking, a group which includes a surprising number of people in the corridors of power~
Glans, you need to change your “Glans Plan” to “Glans Hope,” because there’s no plan involved. In fact, it is hopelessly naïve and unrealistic.
How do you effect #1? The PRC wants a buffer around its territory, so how would they be convinced to stay out, especially under your “plan” that effectively turns the ROK into a wild card and a potential loose cannon as it swings wildly to prevent itself from ever getting attacked again?
As for #3, how do you make that happen in such a way that you don’t create a vacuum that ends up being filled by countries that are far more territory-grabbing in their outlook than the US, with a concomitant arms race as different sides panic about the other side(s) arming themselves more and more.
Really, I don’t get the eagerness to dismantle the Pax Americana, a highly successful arrangement that is pennies on the dollar compared to the alternatives we’ve already seen, with next to no loss of life.
What do you expect from the “Glans Plan”? Some windfall? Even less loss of life? Do you believe that the US presence is keeping Japan, South Korea, North Korea, China, Russian, and Taiwan from holding hands and singing kumbaya? Seriously, what is the motivation for your “plan”?
kushibo, I can’t effect any step of the Glans Plan for Korea. Some day, if the Chinese foreign ministry asks for my advice, I’ll say, “Stay out of Korea.” If the North Korean foreign ministry asks for my advice, I’ll say, “I must speak to the head of state.” If he asks for my advice, I’ll say, “Liquidate your government. Petition the Republic of Korea to take over your territory and govern your people under prinicples of equality and democracy.” If the South Korean head of state and legislature ask for my advice, I’ll say, “Grant the North Korean petition.” If our own State Department and Defense Department ask for my advice, I’ll say, “Abolish United States Forces Korea.”
The goal is one free Korea, at peace with its neighbors.
Glans wrote:
Then you’d best maintain the Pax Americana, and that involves at least American air forces in the Republic of Korea.
Unless 서해, 남해, and ë™í•´ suddenly become the 서산맥, 남산맥, and the ë™ì‚°ë§¥, Korea has no real chance of becoming Switzerland.
How about this?
1. PRC stays out.
–> Effected by reassurances that the US will not put its forces in former DPRK territory (at least north of Pyongyang)
–> Effected by assurances that South Korea will not push for Kando (and possibly grant China continued sea access at Rajin)
2. ROK annexes DPRK.
–> Effected in various ways, or just coming about… not sure
3. USA stays in South Korea and Northeast Asia
–> A continued military presence by the relatively benign US, the sole player in the region without territorial designs on another nation’s holdings, has been as close as the region has to guaranteed “peace with the neighbors.”
What I think you fail to grasp is that without #3, your stated goal is all but impossible.
kushibo, I can’t read the Korean phrases in your comment, so I’ll just say, if I understand step 1 of your plan (China will agree to American forces in Pyongyang), it’s funnier than Bob Hope.
^
Unless the West Sea, the North Sea, and the East Sea suddenly become the Western Mountain Rainge, the Southern Mountain Range, and the Eastern Mountain Range….
Glans wrote:
No, that’s a selective and partial read of what I wrote, focusing only on what is a parenthetical and small possibility).
I don’t think it’s desirable for there to be any US troops in Pyongyang or elsewhere in the former DPRK for a number of reasons, including them becoming a lightning rod of disgruntled northerners when things don’t go completely smoothly.
But the suggestion by Washington, initially, that they be as far north as Pyongyang but no farther north lest China think the US will occupy North Korea, can be a good bargaining chip that can be exchanged later for some other concession.
If you start out by saying that you won’t stick any US troops north of the erstwhile DMZ, then Beijing might come back and insist that there be none, say, north of the latitude of Seoul’s southernmost ward.
My plan actually has a mechanism for getting China to acquiesce to what would likely be in its own interests. Yours is just a fantasy with no grounding in what’s going on in the region.
Sorry. I don’t mean to be harsh, but dismantling a highly successful means of maintaining peace and order will likely bring massive bloodshed in the coming decades, and if I have to use harsh words in order to shake people to reality, so be it.
milton wrote:
ë¹™ê³ ! The Korean Peninsula sits there, enticingly, for a number of powerful players to covet, and they have shown over the past century or so a willingness to lie, cheat, steal, and especially murder in order to get it.
Now I’m not saying that Korea is unique in that it has been invaded by its neighbors so often without having invaded them back (Koreans are a peaceful people; they only invade themselves), but it would be much less of a sitting duck if it were surrounded entirely by mountains than mostly by sea.
Only then it could afford to play Switzerland. Viva la Pax Americana!
milton wrote:
You made a slight error there. It’s South Sea, not North Sea (this appears to be a mere slip rather than a translation error, since you got South Mountain Range right).
The South Sea is, of course, the East China Sea. The East Sea is not the East China Sea, but the Sea of Japan, since Korea is to Japan’s west. Don’t get confused about the West Sea being the East China Sea since it is closest to China. It is actually the Yellow Sea.
I hope that clears things up.
Ha, yes,that was indeed a slip up. Thanks Kushibo.