7 December 2009

BOSWORTH ARRIVES IN PYONGYANG: I’ve paid as much attention to Stephen Bosworth’s visit as I think the likely outcome justifies, but North Korea Leadership Watch has it all covered. More here and here at Yonhap, which calls the talks “crucial,” thus causing me to slowly shake my head in pitiful dismay.

FUNNY, THAT’S JUST WHAT DAVID ASHER WONDERED: Curtis Melvin looks at North Korea’s reported trade figures and wonders how it manages to close the immense trade deficit they suggest.

THIS SEEMS DUMB: The Australian government has denied visas to a group of North Korean artists. Perhaps there are facts I don’t know, perhaps relating to the financial arrangements behind the visit. And I’m not under any illusions that exchanges of this kind will have a very significant impact on North Korean society. But in principle, as long as they don’t finance the regime, what’s wrong with cultural exchanges that bring North Koreans into contact with a freer and more prosperous world?

DOES THIS MEAN THE SANCTIONS ARE WORKING? Iran is forced to delay a missile test because North Korean parts failed to arrive.

AN ENORMOUS TUNNEL SYSTEM UNDER PYONGYANG is described by Hwang Jang Yop, the Rudolf Hess of North Korea:

During a program on Free North Korea Radio, a Seoul-based anti-Pyongyang station, aired Monday, Hwang Jang-yop, a former secretary of the North’s Workers’ Party, claimed that there were secret tunnels built more than 300 meters below ground, linking Pyongyang with strategic locations within a radius of 40 to 50 kilometers. [Yonhap]

This isn’t exactly news to long-time Korea watchers, though I do wonder how they manage to grow grass in them.

PERSONALLY, I BLAME TOJO: In the New York Times, an American author breathes new life into South Korean conspiracy theories by blaming Teddy Roosevelt for the annexation of Korea, and by extension, Pearl Harbor. He makes a good case for Roosevelt’s affinity for Japan and his desire to support Japan’s claims there, if only as an apparent alternative to Russia dominating the weakening Korean state instead. What’s not explained is how Roosevelt was supposed to foresee the brutality of Japan’s occupation, the suppression of Korean culture, or what Roosevelt could have done to stop Japan’s ambitions had he been so inclined. In the end, all of this will attract far more attention from left-wing Korean scholars than, say, subsequent events in Guadalcanal, Tarawa, Leyte, Iwo Jima, or Incheon.

0Shares

5 Responses

  1. I’m curious about point #3. I hadn’t investigated the theme much but I was under the impression that arts in the DPRK are generally controlled by and produced for the state … yet this write-up on the Mansudae Art Studio describes the art produced as “social, political and historical” in content. Should I understand this to mean that they testify to the glorious victories of Juche, or — and just typing this makes me feel dumb — does there exist actual uncensored artistic expression in the DPRK?

  2. Ah, I see you’re raising a valid point — this would have become an exhibition of North Korean propaganda. I should have read Curtis’s post more carefully. That changes things some. On the one hand, I’m not worried that Australia will swoon for juche because of this. On the other hand, I’m more understanding about why the Australian government might question the artistic merits and take offense at the promotion of a repressive ideology. Thanks.

  3. The “artists” in this case are essentially government employees, producing government works-for-hire, and they may qualify for sanctions in that capacity.

    But I’m sure the official story is that they are independent artists who, of their own free will, masturbate over Kim Jong-Il for all their waking hours.

  4. Makes me wonder why they were invited by a government-run institution in the first place, really. Although I suppose they may well be quite talented at what they do, I find it hard to imagine they were under any illusions as to the content…

  5. As for Bradley’s NYT oped on the occasion of the 58th anniversary of that day of infamy, well, he makes several interesting points, although I do not agree with the implication that there is a causal link between Teddy Roosevelt’s actions in 1905 and Pearl Harbor in 1941. That is, war was not “inevitable,” in my view. Further, Bradley seems to assume that the US in 1905 was a great power with the means to control both Japan and Russia.

    One bitter irony in this line of thinking for Korean nationalists is that yes, we heartily blame TR for the “loss” of Korea in 1905, but, wait, didn’t the “inevitable” war against the US in 1941 thanks to Japan’s military expansion that T Rex had unleashed in the end bring liberation to the Koreans?

    I hope that TR, Wilson, and Obama will forever be linked to Korea through their Nobel Peace Prize. Whereas TR played a small role in vanquishing the hopes of the Korean people in 1905 (small, I say, as by the time of the Portsmouth peace conference Japan had already defeated Russia and TR was merely raising Japan’s hand; nor did TR “give” Korea to Japan in return for the Philippines in July), Wilson at least gave hope in 1919 with his proclamation of the “right to self-determination.” I wish President Obama sooner than later takes a stand and give hope to the millions of suffering North Korean people.