Seoul Summit: The status of North Korean human rights NGOs in the ROK

(by guest blogger Andy Jackson)

This a part of a series of posts on the Seoul Summit: Promoting Human Rights in North Korea and related events.

Yoo Se-hee, the president of Citizens United for a Better Society, gave an overview of the status and work of North Korean Human Rights NGOs in Korea. What follows is a summery of his report during the first session of the Seoul Summit on December 9, 2005:

There are about 15,000 registered NGOs in Korea. 4,000 of those are civic groups. Of those 4,000, only 20-30 deal with North Korean human rights.

There are three main types of NK-related NGOs.

1. Those who aid abductees and their families
2. Those who help who defectors who defected due to the food crisis
3. Those who deal with human rights in North Korea by working with North Korean defectors

While each of the NGOs is unique, they have a couple of common characteristics. First, they are all small in size and number. The largest of those NGOs have about 300 active members and 20 or so executive members. They also have financial problems, which make it difficult for them to have very active campaigns. There are several reasons for those problems

1. Many of the larger NGOs in Korea are made up of people who fought for democracy in the past. They are progressives who fought for human rights in South Korea but they are hesitant about criticism of North Korea because criticism of the North was a tactic used by the dictatorial regimes which used to rule Korea.
2. (A bigger reason) The North Korean policy of the current and previous administrations (Roh Moo-hyun and Kim Dae-jung) is very cautious about North Korea. After the 2000 summit in Pyongyang many were hopeful about reconciliation (but that was wishful thinking. Progressives believe that human rights are less important than reconciliation. That is because they believe that reconciliation will naturally lead to improved human rights in North Korea. There are groups working on human rights in North Korea but they do not have government support.
3. There is public apathy to North Korean human rights NGOs. The government promotes the Mt. Geumgang and Gaesang projects and “˜improved’ inter-Korean relations. The work and views of the NGOs are overshadowed by views promoted by the government

But the situation is starting to change, for a couple of reasons. First, there are foreigners actively promoting North Korean human rights who fought for a resolution in the United Nations [NOTE: As evidenced by a recent article in the Korea Times entitled NK Human Rights no longer Taboo in South. It stated that even the famously leftist state-run National Human Rights Commission of Korea would issue a statement on North Korean human rights later this month. – Andy]

Second, North Koreans who defected to the ROK have offered valuable testimony about conditions in North Korea.

I predict that government policy will not change but public attitude might. The public is becoming more interested. The younger generation is starting to show more interest in North Korean human rights as is the religious community.

My views
The people in power now includes many people who fought for democracy against dictatorships supported by Korea’s right wing. In the course of that struggle, they came to believe that anything the Seoul government said must be false. In the government said it is black, it must be white. If the government said that North Korean leaders are demons and wolves, then they must be reasonable human beings. Now that they are the ones in power, it is difficult to shake loose the mental habits formed over a lifetime.

But they can be shamed into at least addressing human rights by pointing out how far their policies towards North Korea have removed them from the fundamental values that they fought for as young people (here I am talking about the bulk of those who struggled for democracy in the 1970s and 80s, not the relative few who were in the direct or indirect employ of Pyongyang). The recent UN vote on North Korea is an important step in showing that it is not just the Americans who are concerned about human rights there. The rising voice of Korean students calling for the government to recognize North Korean human rights concerns can also shame them by comparison with their own struggle for democracy a generation ago.

I don’t expect Chung dong-young to suddenly decide that human rights for North Koreans is a primary policy goal. But it is possible to make him fear for his political future if he does not at least try to get his government to make a minimal effort on human rights. Until 2007, that is the best we can hope for.