How can we evaluate the current U.S. policy on North Korea from the perspective of North Korea democracy movements?
There are many different issues pertaining to North Korea including the liberation of North Korean citizens, South Korea’s security, security on the Korean Peninsula, protection of the international nonproliferation treaty and blocking the circulation of nuclear materials by terrorist groups. These issues must be approached individually and in different ways.
The sudden attack on Pearl Harbor by Japanese Troops on the brink of World War II was a major catastrophe for U.S. security. However, from a different perspective, it was very fortunate for the Chinese. The object differs from which perspective the situation is viewed.
In the view of organizations working for North Korean democratic movements, liberation and democracy must be placed at the core of their activity.
Though the threat of security on the Korean Peninsula does in a way raise Kim Jong Il’s voice, at the same time it also increases greater awareness for average South Koreans to learn about North Korea.
The South Korean system is much more secure than the North Korean system and as a result, there is the possibility that North Korea democracy may profit as the threats to the Korean Peninsula intensify.
Failure of pressure policies and appeasement policies
Moreover, South Korean citizens are strongly based in their comfort zone and as a result there is a need to deliberate these issues carefully.
Let’s compare the pro’s and con’s of the pressure policy and appeasement policy towards North Korea from the perspective of North Korea democracy movements.
First, an advantage of the pressure policy is that it gathers greater interest of South Koreans on North Korean issues while leading a strong response of the North. Second, excluding the essential humanitarian support, all other foreign aid to North Korea is effectively blocked.
A disadvantage of the pressure policy is that it may restrict the activities of the minority democracy advocates in North Korea. Further, as tensions arise, Kim Jong Il may simply raise his voice and South Koreans may feel even more anxious and develop greater notions of insecurity. Finally, in order to maintain an international cooperation, a high level political power is needed.
The advantage of the appeasement policy is the fact that a variety of campaigns can be drafted by different organizations. Further as reform and development progresses, dependence on the outside world may increase. In other words, it will be a little easier for foreign information and influence to enter North Korea.
The disadvantage of the appeasement policy is first, South Koreans may weaken in their intention for North Korea human rights and democracy having become accustomed to a separated yet secure system. Second, it is difficult to assert the common notion with South Korea, the U.S., China and Japan all deliberating North Korean issues.
From the position of North Korea democracy movements, one may say that the pressure policy is slightly more profitable than the appeasement policy. However, this gap is only minimal. Many argue, if the pressure policy is marked a grade of 67 points, then the appeasement policy follows closely behind at 65 points.
Moreover, the tendency to side with one particular policy must not be rashly made. The important thing is to utilize both the pro’s and con’s and respond in a way that will weaken the Kim Jong Il regime and enforce the necessary ability needed in achieving democracy in North Korea.
