When the U.S. Congress passed the North Korean Human Rights Act last October, some of the most negative reactions came from supporters of the South Korean government. Several members of the ruling Uri Party indignantly insisted that the act could threaten peace on the Korean peninsula and damage relations between Pyongyang and Seoul. (20-FEB-05)

This article was written by Young Howard for the Asian Wall Street Journal, where it was published 13 December 2004. It has been edited for republication here. Howard, who HRH met at the recent 6th International conference on North Korean humanvights and refugees was a radical student in South Korea in the 1980s and served two years in prison for his anti-government activities. He is now an international coordinator for the North Korean Democracy Network (www.nknet.org).

“It’s obvious that the bill could be used as a legal ground to interfere into North Korea’s state affairs,” Chung Bong-Ju, a former pro-democracy activist and now a legislator in the ruling Uri Party, said. “In addition, the bill could increase tension on the Korean peninsula.” Leftist activist groups that support the government of President Roh Moo Hyun, such as the influential People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy, also denounced the act, claiming it “could negatively affect peace in the Korean peninsula rather than contribute to the improvement of the human rights condition in North Korea.”

Class struggle or imperialism
At first sight, this might seem strange. Only 20 years ago, those who today oppose this modest attempt to promote freedom and democracy in North Korea were at the forefront of the campaign against South Korea’s military dictators. But what’s less widely recognized is that, even then, many of them had another agenda–which explains the way they’re so vigorous in rallying to Pyongyang’s defense today. The anti-government movement in the 1980s in South Korea was dominated by socialists who espoused, some of whom looked to the Soviet Union as a model while others espoused the juche philosophy of Kim Il Sung’s North Korea. Colleges and universities in the South at that time acted as types of “liberated zones” for social revolutionaries. During student elections, candidates competed with revolutionary agendas, the key difference being whether radical social change would be better achieved by proletariat class struggle or by national liberation from American imperialism.

Sympathy for Pyongyang still to be found in South Korea
Because the juche philosophy of self-reliance appealed to a deeply-rooted nationalism in the South Korean people, its advocates soon triumphed over their Soviet-orientated rivals. Some core activists began listening to North Korean short-wave radios that gave out instructions on how to foment unrest. A few forged close ties with the Korean Workers Party that is nominally the North’s ruling party. During and after 1980s, those “revolutionary” students graduated from college and joined the workforce, as everything from teachers to social activists, government officials or politicians. Not surprisingly, 20 years later many have risen to positions of responsibility. In Korea, they are known as the “386-ers.” That’s a reference to the fact that they are now in their 30s (although, in reality, many have already turned 40), entered university in the 1980s, and born in the 1960s.
Although they may have abandoned their youthful revolutionary zeal, elements of the old dogma retain, including a strong ideological hostility to the U.S. and sympathy for Pyongyang.

Sentimental policies keep Kim Jong-Il’s alive
That sympathy has managed to survive even the mass starvation and refugee exodus of the 1990s which should have shown even its most ardent supporters the true nature of the North Korean regime. Instead of accepting that Kim Jong Il was starving and enslaving his people, they sought to shift the blame to the U.S., arguing that America’s failure to lift sanctions, and treat the rogue regime as an equal partner, was somehow responsible for its shortcomings. From there it is only a small step to arguing that the U.S. should never “interfere” in North Korea’s “internal affairs,” even when it develops nuclear weapons that pose such a risk of proliferation. Some still believe that North Korea is a socialist country and claim that, although Pyongyang may have its problems, South Korea is not perfect either. That’s the argument often used to justify Seoul’s “sunshine policy” of one-sided assistance to Pyongyang. What the 386-ers seem incapable of understanding is that their position inadvertently contributes to prolonging the existence of the world most evil regime.

Idealism in disguise
It’s that historic and ideological background of South Korea’s former democracy activists which explains why they are not just silent about the world’s worst human-rights abuser, but even oppose modest efforts by others to improve the situation. That leads to the sad conclusion that their championing of human rights, freedom, and democracy during the fight against South Korea’s military rulers during the 1980s were not out of any genuine respect for such values, but instead simply a tactical tool for gaining political power.