51吃瓜

It is time to re-imagine North Korea in international politics with a focus on unification, instead of demonization.

Ask the average American their thoughts on North Korea and, without hesitation, most will recite the litany of evils that the country is caricatured as, but very few know much beyond a seemingly programmed list of horrors. Searching 鈥淣orth Korea鈥� on the Internet reveals millions of hits echoing a consensus that the Democratic People鈥檚 Republic of Korea (DPRK) is an ongoing 鈥渕eth-addicted,鈥� 鈥渘uclear threat to humanity,鈥� 鈥渁 holocaust,鈥� a 鈥渉ell-on-earth,鈥� and a place where 鈥渦nimaginable cruelties鈥� such as 鈥渃astrating the disabled鈥� and 鈥渕ass murder by machine-gun fire鈥� regularly occur.

Even if true, in-depth inquiry reveals little actual proof of these claims. Regardless, most surmise that (for the good of its people) the country听听and 鈥渓iberated鈥� as quickly as possible.

It seems that听鈥溾�� about the country is predominately informed by North Korean defectors and their sponsor nongovernmental organizations (NGO), which are considered by mainstream media as primary sources. One struggles to find Western pundits, much less 鈥渆xperts,鈥� whose worldviews are not in some way informed by the sensational, un-provable narratives of these groups.

Through the immense influence of North Korean human rights narratives, policy approaches to the country are borne. Robert McChesney describes a contemporary media crisis in his book, , as a result of an 鈥渁nti-democratic communications policy crisis.鈥�

This author鈥攁 former DMZ reconnaissance soldier and information warfare officer鈥攑resents recent examples and draws out the implications of the hypothesis听on听鈥溙齩f military/national security strategy鈥�; and the fact that human rights awareness campaigns are military initiatives in the Information Era, which are used to program global thinking that perpetuates the ongoing North Korean听鈥�problem鈥� and results in hallucinatory responses to the DPRK听fiction. The analysis seeks not to challenge the tenants of that 鈥渉allucinatory thinking,鈥� but to deconstruct what leads to it and interrogate the impact on global security such hysteria has.

The Ongoing War(s)

Let us start from the very beginning. The 1953 Armistice Agreement, signed between the United Nations and the United States and DPRK governments, called for 鈥渁 complete cessation of hostilities and of all acts of armed force in Korea until a final peaceful settlement is achieved.鈥� At the time of its signing, all actors clearly understood the听听that hostilities brought to the peninsula. Unfortunately, the Korean War has been long forgotten, and the US government outsources its agitation operations to NGOs; the words of the armistice left completely deprived of their meaning.

Flickr

US involvement in听听of Chinese containment. Sixty-two years later, the United States is still using the Republic of Korea (ROK) as a frontline military base camp for its China containment strategy. US Assistant Secretary of State听听that South Korea 鈥減lays a major role in the international order,鈥� and that the ROK鈥檚 compliance with US strategy is necessary for making Asia the 鈥渒ind of region that you and I [meaning the imperial West] want to live in.鈥� But the American dream of spreading democratic values has (at the institutional level) been ethnocentrically informed and driven by a 听seeking to exert hegemonic power.

Nicola Perugini and Neve Gordon best articulate the irony of听jingoistic听human rights NGO foreign policy influence in their book, ,听where they state: 鈥淸V]iolence protects human rights from violence that violates human rights.鈥� They claim 鈥渉uman rights discourse has become a desired resource for those seeking political influence and power,鈥� and this discourse is the new 鈥渓ingua franca of global moral speak鈥濃�攑ointing out that human rights politics has become 鈥渁 new morality in international relations, a way of conducting international politics according to moral norms and rules 鈥� human rights are now canonical text for the moral disposition of world affairs.鈥�

Andrew Burt, the author of , explains that American identity 鈥渋s a way of defining听who we are by who we are against.鈥� In periods of increased threat to American identity, such as during the Red Scare or post-9/11, the US has gone to war to defend its beliefs. For decades, the American government has shaped and harnessed mass hysteria, according to Burt, to achieve American political ends abroad. The UN North Korea human rights Commission of Inquiry (COI) conveniently established itself within four months of Kim Jong-il鈥檚 death. As PhD candidate听: 鈥淪ince 2006, every Commission of Inquiry has preceded military action that worsened human conditions.鈥�

The National Endowment for Democracy听听those NGOs that develop such hysteria. It is interesting that in order to obtain a NED grant, one must meet two qualifiers in their proposal: to promote religious freedom and human rights. Burt鈥檚 arguments pass the Litmus Test for听government intentionality to manufacture and harness human rights hysteria, otherwise NED would give grants for cultural and educational exchanges without the two requirements鈥攌nowing that those forms of engagement spread democracy more effectively than forcing one鈥檚 own ethnocentric worldviews on 鈥渢he cognitive other.鈥� The fact that human rights awareness campaigns have exponentially increased since the COI is concerning for several reasons, and it is worthy of explaining how the human rights network is constructed and aligned.

While NED is the go-to organization for financial support among North Korea Human Rights (NKHR) NGOs, the Department of Defense finances a vast human rights industry. Human rights influence is rooted directly to the military, according to Perugini and Gordon, and has thereby resulted in 鈥渢he proliferation of human rights appropriations.鈥� They state: 鈥淸I]t is not surprising that state security institutions that hold the monopoly over legitimate violence also began invoking international humanitarian and human rights law in their work.鈥� They point out that according to Amnesty International, 鈥渢he US government trains approximately 100,000 foreign police and soldiers from more than 150 countries in approximately 275 military schools and installations while offering 4,100 human rights courses.鈥�

Following international media big and small, especially from the US, one acutely gets the feeling that听: they target, explode and seek to destroy all that is in sight. They are about precisions, but like bombs their explosions can be exactly the opposite: imprecise, unpredictable and indiscriminate in their maiming. Although their campaigns impact thinking here, their devastation is always across the border: foreign land, foreign lives and foreign necessary cost of winning. Human rights awareness campaigns have transformed NKHR NGOs into US government-funded information warfare contractors.

Flickr

This author interrogates this approach for several reasons. First, it is known that a lying Iraqi听听the decision-making process that led the US into Operation Iraqi Freedom鈥攁 war that destabilized the Middle East, leaving it in ruins. Second, North Korean defectors have been known to organize听听to sway public opinion in their interests, threatening rule of law and national security in South Korea. Third, the soundness of US government financial support for a network of NKHRs that actively conspire to carry out operations that agitate鈥攔ather than peacefully resolve鈥攖he world鈥檚 oldest and most volatile conflict must be questioned.

Information Warfare Contractors in Action听

Collapsing a country is no easy task. The strategy, or so it appears, consists of several campaigns occurring simultaneously. It is unknown to the author who鈥攊f any single person鈥攊s orchestrating the overall 鈥淣orth Korea Operation,鈥� but it is apparent that there is a concerted effort to forcibly collapse the regime.

Allen Weinstein, who helped draft the legislation establishing NED, was听听when he said in 1991: 鈥淎 lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA.鈥� Not surprisingly, a good portion of NED funds听, which has听听toward 鈥渁ccelerating change鈥� in the country, but also in the international community to harness public hysteria in support of the operation.

NKHR NGOs actively conspired on their future plans at the听, which contrary to claims of 鈥渁 diverse nature of conference attendants,鈥� only听听points recommended people-to-people exchanges. The other 13 ranged from taking Kim Jong-un to the International Criminal Court, to a ten-way rephrasing of 鈥渃onduct information operations.鈥�

The primary 鈥渋nformation warfare contractors鈥� carrying-out the 鈥淣orth Korea Operation鈥� are: Human Rights Foundation (HRF); the Committee for Human Rights in North Korea (HRNK); the European Alliance for Human Rights in North Korea (EAHRNK); Fighters for a Free North Korea (FFNK); Radio Free Asia (RFA); Free North Korea Radio (FNKR); Open Radio North Korea (ORNK); North Korea Freedom Coalition (NKFC); and last but not least, an incalculable number of听.

The Rendon Group, a premier US military and government strategic communications contracting firm, published this author鈥檚听听how HRF鈥檚 鈥淗ack them Back鈥� campaign became a threat to ROK national security that pushed them to the听,听during a time when high level inter-Korean talks were taking place. The government, Christian groups and various foundations sponsor HRF鈥檚 work, even though听听actively working to collapse governments that threaten the American identity鈥攕uch as North Korea.

Besides sabotaging high-level inter-Korean talks, HRF also brought its media and balloons out in the height of recent cross-DMZ fire volleys.听听over the 鈥渓and mine/loudspeaker incident,鈥� FFNK (HRF鈥檚 balloon-launching point of contact NKHR defector group)听鈥攁n act that could have resulted in the conflict spiraling out of control.

Celebrity defectors are a rapidly-emerging听and 听at the forefront of a militarized disinformation campaign against the West. Few understand the Korean War or Korean Peninsula in a complete, holistic and academic way. Celebrity defectors serve to monopolize an听empirical knowledge deficit of North Korea in the same way Iraqi defector 鈥淐urveball鈥� informed our views of Iraq in 2003.

Flickr

In 2014, celebrity defector Yeon Mi Park鈥檚 meteoric rise,听 and听听caused many analysts () to raise their brows. Yeon Mi Park became a 鈥淢edia Fellow鈥� for OFF (an offshoot of HRF) in spring 2014 and went on a world tour that has not ended. Most notably, she spoke at the听, and in 2015 she has been a听headlining speaker at 鈥淔reedom Fest,鈥� an organized collective of philanthropists, right-wing pundits and deep-pocketed political strategists.听听over $12,500 per speech, until her book is released. Her fees could then increase to over $40,000 per speech.

Following now-disgraced defector听,听the core 听is that North Korea is a hell on earth and is currently experiencing a Holocaust. Despite the fact that Park , traveling and living lavishly听(by regime standards), the majority of people believe her story wholeheartedly.

It is听听that they often tell the world what they think people want to hear. In a soon-to-be-released film, , Park furthers her core message in the movie鈥檚 theme, which is that the North Korean leadership is Nazi Gestapo and its people like the Jews in prison camps. The movie is fictitious, but it will have a tremendous impact on Western perceptions and is likely to have a hypnotic and听听on the public, whereby millions of people call for the violent overthrow of the regime and persecution of anybody arguing for peaceful resolution of the conflict.

Focus on Unification as a Solution

Information operations can be used to cause change in the country by exposing average North Koreans to the outside world. But in their current militarized behavior, these initiatives are seemingly intended to harness support from the West for collapsing the country.

We must therefore ask three questions.听First,听how does demonizing North Korea improve human rights conditions without causing jingoistic mass hysteria in favor of war? Second, how do these agitation operations affect ROK national security? 听Third, is there not a more diplomatic path to achieving unification of Korea?

Michael Lammbrau, bureau chief of the Arirang Institute,听听that unification is a mentality, quoting Georgetown Professor David Maxwell in saying:

鈥淭he problem is we think in linear terms when looking at the North Korean dilemma. We first look to resolve the nuclear problem, then the human rights problem, and then finally unification, but that assumes the current regime is willing to give up their nuclear weapons and willing to resolve its human rights issues. I am saying they are not going to do that, I am saying we have to focus on unification.鈥�

鈥淢omentum is now slowly shifting to a 鈥渦nification first鈥� mentality. Goldman Sachs agrees with President Park [Geun-hye],鈥� Lammbrau points out. That said, it is time for human rights politics to not only be questioned in their impact on international politics, but also time for experts, pundits, scholars, journalists and policymakers to scrutinize with careful forethought the impact NKHRs have on human rights in North Korea.

In short, it is time to re-imagine North Korea in international politics with a focus on unification鈥攊nstead of demonization鈥攊f we truly seek to liberate North Korean people from the isolation they have endured for the past 70 years of the unending Korean War.

*[This article was originally published by .]

The views expressed in this article are the author鈥檚 own and do not necessarily reflect 51吃瓜鈥檚 editorial policy.

Photo Credit: / /

We bring you perspectives from around the world. Help us to inform and educate. Your听donation听is tax-deductible. Join over 400 people to become a donor or you could choose to be a听sponsor.