As I wrote before, the only way Koreans turn around is to hurt them at the pockets. Economic sanctions put on South Korea will stop Communist movement in SK. People will change their attitude about Commies at once when they lose their jobs. This adjustment is long overdue.

And, the time has come to stamp out these Commies. Outside pressures, especially financial pressures, from the US and the Europe are desperately needed.

Dispatches.-.North.Korea.-.Undercover.In.The.Secret.State.avi

Yes, the ROK govt has accepted some refugees since its policy was announced, in its typically inconsistent and reactive way.

As far as Washington, my impression here on the ground is that it’s mostly the result of factionalism and institutional paralysis, and that this administration’s famous message discipline hasn’t extended outside the Beltway. The result, of course, is just as bad.

To me, the answer to Chung, Roh, Bush, Annan, or anyone else being a hypocrite is not to dismiss the endeavor or call down a pox on them all, but to call them out and put public pressure on them until they buckle and do what is right. Fool that I am, I actually believe this to be possible, because I believe that President Bush himself sincerely believes in doing what is right, though the execution is both fraught with difficulty and often amateurishly done.

Would than go beyond Hans Blix from Team America?

The UN voting on tough language and such ultimately exposes the impotence of the organization — if one of the big nations decides to push something that has been voted on on paper. Iraq War II is the perfect example, but the history of the UN is filled with others.

In the Cold War, we could always blame it on the Soviet-US camps’ stand-off. The major players were all too big and too opposed to each other to get anything done.

Now?

There is little will to get things done.

If the UN adopts strong language and cites “serious consequences” with North Korea, is Kim Jong Il going to quake in his boots and reform?

No.

But let’s get even more to the heart of the issue.

Is UN action going to get South Korea and China to cut the North off?

Is it going to get even Japan and the US to cut what remaining aid it gives?

Is it going to get others to say even that the 6 Party Talks should be abandonned because they are not even discussing other key, major issues?

Is it going to alter the status quo?

I don’t see it…..

The US not taking in refugees, however, and moving to do other things within its power to pressure North Korea, and make those who grossly support it (SK & China) pay, is a different matter….

Joshua, has the ROK government accepted any North Korean escapees since Chung’s infamous policy was revealed/announced?

Has the United States? Has any other country? (These are real questions, not rhetorical devices.)

At least the ROK embassies can hide behind government policy, no matter how repugnant that policy may be.

I would argue that this, too, is a violation of the spirit and even the letter of ROK law (in reference to the point you make about US law below).

The U.S. embassies are defying the spirit, if not the letter, of the NK Human Right Act, most of which remains mostly unfunded a year after enactment.

No offense to Joshua, but does this really surprise anyone? I have been making reference to the utter lack of U.S. support for North Korean escapees for months.

In September I wrote, in reference to US legislation now calling for taking in North Korean refugees, “But where are the towns in Minnesota and Wisconsin full of former DPRK citizens now seeking a new life?” (The Minnesota-Wisconsin towns are a reference to Hmong refugees.)

One notable commenter replied, “Certainly the US will take some North Korea refugees, but to take as many as South Korea? That’s absurd. DPRK citizens speak Korean, so if they have to leave their country, it would be easiest for them to go to Korea. As there are plenty of them in China, perhaps China should be a close second. If they need to come to the US, I’m sure they will be welcome, as plenty of Vietnamese, Cambodia, and Meung have been in the past.” [Emphasis mine.]

Well, that ain’t happening. Washington seems to be feeling “buyer’s remorse” over the North Korean Human Rights Act.

Instead of actually doing something to help the escapees, too many people are too comfortable beating South Korea over the head with this issue, even though South Korea has (had?) brought in thousands of North Korean refugees and the United States has brought in zero.

I had hopes that this would change with the new U.S. legislation, but it hasn’t. I had hopes that implementation of the U.S.’s new-found example would shame the Roh-Chung administration into reversing its policy, but no real implementation has been forthcoming.

Instead, the hypocrisy has just grown deeper and deeper, and it is the North Koreans who suffer.

Furthermore, there’s no “first refuge” excuse in third countries in SE Asia. The well-founded fear of persecution is beyond question. Frankly, I have doubts about our own government’s compliance with the UN Refugee Convention. I’d like to hear the argument that our own government is in compliance. The hypocrisy argument is starting to stick.

Hallelujah! Like I said, I’m glad someone like Joshua finally said it. I have been making that hypocrisy argument for months. In June, I wrote that it was “a time when few other countries — including the United States — are willing to accept any North Koreans except those who make it to that country’s shores on their own.” (I could find more examples of these, but Marmot’s archives are in some other hole.)

South Korea has refugee fatigue, which is no real excuse in and of itself, but what the fu** excuse does Washington have?

And why just beat up Washington on this? How about Tokyo? Ottawa? Brussels (the European Union)? Canberra? Does everybody just expect that South Korea will absorb all 300,000 refugees, plus the thousands more that would come later?

Or the real culprint, Beijing?

Most inexcusable of all is the ever-cowardly UNHCR, which is about as useful as an overturned molasses tanker on a blind curve.

I hope it doesn’t really happen, but an example of exquisite hypocrisy would be for the Bush or future Cheney Administration to use the UNHCR’s lack of effective action as an excuse for UN reform.

At least the ROK embassies can hide behind government policy, no matter how repugnant that policy may be. The U.S. embassies are defying the spirit, if not the letter, of the NK Human Right Act, most of which remains mostly unfunded a year after enactment. Furthermore, there’s no “first refuge” excuse in third countries in SE Asia. The well-founded fear of persecution is beyond question. Frankly, I have doubts about our own government’s compliance with the UN Refugee Convention. I’d like to hear the argument that our own government is in compliance. The hypocrisy argument is starting to stick.

Most inexcusable of all is the ever-cowardly UNHCR, which is about as useful as an overturned molasses tanker on a blind curve.

For the North Koreans, there is no Sugihara.