The news that Christian missionaries (mostly Korean-American and Korean but some from other nationalities as well) have been going into North Korea with the agenda of evangelizing (i.e. spreading the gospel) is nothing new. I, however, did not know that much of this was happening under the guise of a company - either some kind of trade or tourism. And just to clarify: I bear no relation to the man in the article despite sharing the same last name.
Korean-American and Korean missionaries continue to push these boundaries. Many, at one point or another, have been caught distributing Bibles, jailed, then cried for help either from the Korean government or the US government. The man is still in jail in North Korea and surprisingly the North Korean government has allowed his mother to come visit him. This extraordinarily "compassionate", relatively speaking, from the perspective of the North Korean regime. My hunch is that this would never have occurred under the previous rule of Kim Jong Il. The fact that Americans are allowed to even go in to North Korea as tourists is also, in my opinion, a remarkable change and - in pure speculation - an indication that North Korea (DPRK) wants to interact with other countries. This is also, in part, due to the annoyance China has had with DPRK. But I digress. The DPRK seems to be softening a little bit was the point of that. Which is also to say: Kenneth Bae will probably (almost certainly) not be receiving the, much harsher, treatment that North Koreans get when they are jailed. The punishment for a foreigner caught distributing a Bible, trying to evangelize, expressing dissent or discontent about the state, attempting to coordinate North Korean defection, is much less benign than a North Korean caught with a Bible, expressing discontent, humming a Korean pop song, or attempting to defect. The punishment for North Koreans is much much harsher and some will result in the death penalty, which brings me to my first point and my initial reaction to this article:
These missionaries are being selfish.
Attempting to evangelize, or respond to their "calling" by spreading the gospel to North Koreans, is not for North Koreans but themselves. First, let me state: I am pro 'Freedom of Conscience'. Think what you think. And under that freedom of conscience is the freedom of religion and culture. Do your thing. So I am not necessarily against any conspicuous evangelism, though I don't really prefer it. I'll talk to the Mormon missionaries, I'll talk to the Jehovah's witnesses, I'll take their pamphlet but when it gets too zealous and you're taking an imperialist attitude of moral superiority then I take issue. Having said that, in the western context these missionaries are fully within their rights and capabilities to speak and spread the gospel if they feel so inclined. But taking this position of religious righteousness and uncontainable desire to show everybody 'God's Love' to North Korea is in many respects irresponsible. North Korea is, arguably, the most repressed state in the world right now. The degrees of punishment and the severity in which they are carried out reminds one of Mrs. Agatha Crunchbull from Roald Dahl's Matilda. The punishment is so extreme that they are difficult to believe. One example is the practice of "three generations of punishment" and their concentration camps (not only do you go to the concentration camp but your whole family and then the subsequent two generations afterwards are born in the camp). North Korea is a state in which people are killed and sent to one of the many concentration camps way too easily. Given this knowledge, which missionaries interested in North Korea are well aware, one raises the question of why anyone would go to North Korea and subliminally preach the gospel, clandestinely pass out or transcribe passages, to North Koreans - where possessing a Bible is potentially punishable by death? Why would you put them in that position? The worst that will happen to a missionary is jail, like Kenneth Bae, or kicked out of the country like Sobkowicz. The worst that will happen to a North Korean is death. Just ten days ago on Nov. 3, there were news reports about 80 people being put to death for watching a South Korean drama. So my reaction to this article about Christian missionaries going to North Korea under the auspice of some company, was that they were being selfish by putting others in danger for their own spiritual fulfillment.
Upon second reflection, there is a broader project - while I'm personally skeptical, for reasons I give later on - of this kind of evangelism and it kind of relates to Korea's history of independence.
The broader purpose for North Korea activists, those who are indeed doing something about it which many happen to be zealous evangelical Christians, is ultimately to see the collapse of the North Korean state. In the meantime, many go into North Korea or to China arrange escapes and defections. Hide them in China for a while and then off to another country. Most North Koreans who get to South Korea pass through three, four, or five countries before they arrive. All the while, evangelizing is also happening and most that defect are underground Christians. And yes, like the article says, Christianity had existed in Korea prior to the wars and prior to the division. So the existence of underground Christians is very plausible just as it is plausible that there are underground Buddhist as well. But without going into Korea's history with Christianity, Christianity was a strong force for maintaining social solidarity of Koreans outside of Korea during Japanese imperialism. By outside of Korea, I'm primarily referring to Hawaii, the Korean Independence Movement and the exiled Korean government in Manchuria did have Christians (Methodists and Presbyterians *and, I'm pretty sure, Catholics too) participating as well but no explicit religious overtone in their mission to regain soverignty and independence.
The first president, or dictator whichever is your perspective, Rhee during his incarceration, prior to becoming president, also converted many others to Christianity. Many Koreans who were imported into Hawaii, as cheap labour (indentured servitude), to work on sugar plantations in horrid conditions were also Christians. Ironically, the man who persuaded the Koreans to come for their "new life" in America was also Christian. White Christian man goes to a Korean Christian man to persuade other Korean Christians and friends to board a ship and work on sugar plantations for piss wages and horrid living conditions. Go figure. Subsequently, on this ship to Hawaii many who were not Christian "converted" to Christianity. I put converted in quotation marks because this could mean various things as it is not uncommon for people to convert for solidarity/social reasons. And Koreans are a proud and loyal bunch.
So Christianity can be considered to have been, at least partially, a force in the independence movement. To what extent is another question. Koreans have much pride in their ethnicity so there's some question about its impact on identity early on (today this is a different story). Anyway, considering that Christianity was a force, it could be argued that spreading the gospel and clandestinely disseminating the Bible can motivate a populist upheaval of the North Korean state. And this may be the logic in which these missionaries are operating.
However, I am skeptical not only about this approach but its efficacy as well. First, any corporation like the ones mentioned above that allows missionaries to go into North Korea to evangelize is limited to a very limited area where those most loyal and useful to the state are kept in relative prosperity compared to the rest of the poor and hungry population of North Korea. In other words, these missionaries may only have touched a fraction of a percent. You might say that even a small number of persons could spread the message. But like I mentioned, this is a very small percentage of those who are actually living in relatively "decent" conditions of the capital of N. Korea. This is the group that wailed and cried when Kim Jong Il died. Maybe 10% of the population. The ones who look presentable for media. This group is not likely to create an uprising of significant impact to shake the government. The North Korean military is not afraid to massacre its own people. Somebody told me that Kim Jong Il once said that as long as 10% of the population is surviving it is a sucessful state. Don't know if this is true but I would not be surprised if it were. In a country where people are executed everyday, I don't think a Christian mobilization is going to happen. In this regard, I find this kind of spiritual awakening/conversion to Christianity to prompt revolution a romantic notion at best. In sum, I find the political aim of Christian missionaries dubious because 1) they are evangelising the portion of the population that benefits the most from the N. Korean state. And 2) a populist uprising is not plausible because of the mundane fear of death, punishment, and ruthless nature of the North Korean military that is not afraid to turn on its people when ordered to do so. (I mean, South Korea turned its military on a student/populist uprising in Gwangju in 1980 - 5.18 - for almost ten days and killed over a hundred and injured thousands).
*Update (Nov. 15): I understand that my post is somewhat pessmistic about the Christian evangelical approach to dismantling the N. Korean state. Howard Zinn, a man who's thoughts I turn to often in random spurts, would say: "Pessimism becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy; it reproduces itself by crippling our willingness to act." And while Zinn is talking about the US, a place in which action and defiance is - relatively - possible, turning this thought to the North Korea and the love of Korea as a holistic country changes the surrounding discussion of this statement. Is my critique to "pessimistic" such that it cripples a willingness to act? Should we encourage these actions by Christian missionaries going into North Korea on the grounds that the willingness to act and maintain the view that it will help motivate the people? In other words, is bull-headed action better than critical thought? I'm not sure that it is... chess is an intense game of thinking your actions before you move, anticipating the opponents reaction, and thinking about the next move in response. Chess masters can think and anticipate moves much further down the line. I don't know how many but it's ridiculous the extent they can anticipate how the game will play out. And any chess player will know that a bad move can be costly down the road. Rash action is not always desirable. And my own position is that careful thought, consideration, and timing is equally as important. That is, knowing when and where to strike are critical to reflection and thought.
There is a saying in Korea: 지피지기 백전백승 (ji-pee-ji-gee baek-juhn-baek-seung), which translates into, "know yourself and know your opponent and in a hundred battles a hundred wins"
So to this end, it is important to be reflexive as well as investigative of an opponent or object of study. Over-estimating one's own capabilities and undermining an opponent is a sure recipe for devastation.
So with respect to North Korea, we need to think carefully about what the actual aim is: to topple the regime? to stop human rights violations? to understand the country and the culture? South Korea must be respected in this area as well. The two countries are tied together with the same umbilical cord. There's much to think about on this...
No comments:
Post a Comment