The danger with stuff like this is that one gets desensitized after a while:
Running from harsh conditions under the totalitarian government in Pyongyang, an estimated 200,000 to 300,000 North Korean refugees are now living illegally in China, roughly half of them women, according to missionary and other religious-oriented groups working in the area. While many North Korean men end up finding jobs as cheap laborers, South Korean government officials and human rights groups say the vast majority of the North Korean women are sold into temporary or long-term service as sexual slaves or suffer other kinds of sexual or physical abuse, often inside entertainment clubs.
While female refugees across the world remain at high risk of abuse or exploitation, the North Korean women are extraordinarily vulnerable, aid groups say. The Chinese government has refused to grant the North Koreans official status as refugees, largely based on Beijing’s traditional ties to Pyongyang, as well as fears that such a designation would dramatically boost the already steady influx over the border.
Without organized refugee camps or access to assistance from such international bodies as the United Nations, the North Korean women have no safety net. Though the primary targets are single women or unaccompanied wives, even married female refugees traveling with their husbands are occasionally forced into sexual servitude — either with or without their spouse’s consent, aid groups and the refugees say.
Now, the Infidel argues for “a moratorium on all such articles,” and with good reason. I’m going to link to it anyway; regardless of whether one uses it to promote partisan political agendas or not, it’s a good piece relaying realities that need to be taken into consideration.
8 Comments
Yes, Sugar Shin, it is often wonderful to see people who run around calling everyone else they disagree with a racist show such an obsession with the color of a person’s skin…..
That tragedies happen does not automatically force the partisan choice. People of course are going to try to use them as evidence.
On the whole, though, it’s better than people have an honest idea of what goes in in the DPRK than if they don’t. It at least increases the chance that we’ll be choosing between rational, informed alternative policies, IMO.
My answer to the multiple choice question is:
1. Acknowledge that it is acceptable to have external military intervention to end gross human rights abuses, which is exactly what the western soldiers meant when they said “never again” after uncovering human ovens.
2. Implement policy 1 at a time of “our” (free world) choosing, in a manner we consider strategic, using resources (including coalition allies) in the most appropriate manner. E.g. it may be more appropriate to have France doing peacekeeping duties in Kabul (which the US hates) rather than interfering with targetting in the combat phase of OIF like they did in Kosovo.
At the moment we have a hard enough time just getting people to acknowledge that the US et al had more right to end systematic rape in Iraq than Saddam did to execute said rape. With western morality devolved to this sorry state, half the campaign is just de-Communizing our own societies like Germany was de-Nazified. See this:
http://www.nationalreview.com/.....260828.asp
We are in a funny situation where after winning the cold war physically, the USSR may still end up winning the cold war mentally. How ignomious is it to be defeated by a dead enemy?
I’m not advocating censorship. The press can print whatever it thinks will sell, but in the blogosphere there should be a higher standard, and the InstaPundit one. It would be naive to believe a newspaper only prints stories when they happen. These kinds of stories have been around for awhile, and particularly last year during the embassy incidents in Beijing. Edwards has a better approach, although I think its hasty and ill-conceived. I prefer a forum to regularize and institutionalize regional contacts, because the Korea problem begins with its geographical vulnerability.
But debating options is better than fact-finding, because all these emotive images kill the kind of debate this issue really needs. Let the Koreans assume the sentimental mantle! K-Bloggers should explain, not describe.
“With western morality devolved to this sorry state, half the campaign is just de-Communizing our own societies like Germany was de-Nazified.”-Paul Edwards
Gee, have you Rudyard Kipling in your ancestry line. Sounds pretty much like the “white man?쨈s burden”-march song. If you are the first armed- to-the-teeth “Rambo” to hopp over the DMZ to topple Kim Jong Il and risk your precious life and existence personally, I would happily follow your lead, Sahib! So show us Koreans how you would de-Communize North Korea with Western morality. No? U meant only pulling down the BUTTON (in your home bunker) to unleash a war inferno on the Korean peninsula. Hey, what about that: no, thank you, come back with a less deadlier solution or shut up.
Thanks Sugar, you’ve demonstrated the problem. Let me categorize the various problems:
1. I didn’t actually propose immediate military action against NK, just that the free world (including South Korea) have the right to do so, while not necessarily the obligation.
2. Instead of denigrating DPRK, you have instead decided that I am far worse, calling me “Rudyard Kipling” as if it is more honorable to watch horror in the world and ignore it, than to actually want to do something about, and god forbid a white man should do anything about it, horror of horrors.
3. You have decided that civilians in a democratic country have no right to use their military, instead, only soldiers have the right to an opinion. This hesitance to appear hypocritical is so dangerous that it has actually resulted in US civilians doing exactly that, holding back from using force, and wind up with 3000 dead civilians when it only cost a couple of dozen soldiers to take out Bin Laden’s camps all along. By the way, countries where only the military have the right to an opinion are generally called military dictatorships, in case you’re interested.
Now some misunderstandings. I’m talking about de-communizing western societies, not North Korea, in my original message. I’m pretty sure the Norks are completely de-communized already. Revolutionary zeal doesn’t last that long.
I didn’t actually specify what should be done about North Korea *specifically*, but since you brought it up, since South Korea has propped up North Korea and generally considers the Norks to be brothers, and is convinced USA is the enemy, well, you’ve made your bed (if you’re South Korean), you get to sleep in it if you’re wrong.
Militarily, I would probably be more inclined to withdraw all US troops and then use the carriers to destroy the oil pipelines and place an economic blockade on NK. Make it clear that the South Koreans aren’t taking part in this “adventure”, in fact, you can even burn the US flag in Seoul, that seems par for the course. Either way, this gives the best chance for your brothers to show their brotherly love by laying off Seoul.
Another option would be to see if we can persuade Russia to let us in from the North. I read a report recently that said Russia was of the opinion that military action may be required.
Anyway, none of these options are good. I’m not saying any particular action should be taken in North Korea, just that if we get the option to do something easy (like Syria), we have every right to do so. Only (highly successful) USSR propaganda has led us to believe that we’re the moral equivalent of despots like Saddam & co.
By the way, sorry if being white in a public place offends you. Some would call that racist. Not me though. Whites are fair game.
Infidel, my understanding is that China has already shown North Korea what needs to be done to transform a closed communist police state into a capitalist powerhouse, without even needing to give up the one-party rule. But the Norks aren’t interested, sounds too much like hard work. So long as Kim still gets his caviar, why should he care? If they’re going to listen to anyone, it is the Chinese. They didn’t. Saddam lived in the same sort of fantasy world. Now what?
By the way, I read a report that Pakistan may have tested a nuke for North Korea, so they may have a tested nuke at their disposal after all. With stakes like this, I wouldn’t invade this particular country for human rights issues alone, that’s for sure. Which I guess is the answer to the original post. Do a cost-benefit analysis, and conclude it’s too expensive to fix this particular problem. Wasn’t too expensive to “fix” Haiti though.
One other thing that should be on the de-communizing agenda is to acknowledge that dictatorship is simply modern day slavery.
I wrote an article about some of these issues if anyone is interested:
http://www.mukto-mona.com/Spec.....r_paul.htm
I wouldn’t go so far as calling China an economic powerhouse. Its really more like Indonesia with an extra billion workers.