The Undiscovered Country

 

 

 

The Undiscovered Country

 

Workshop held in Berlin offers multiple perspectives on North Korea

Jan Creutzenberg (jannberg@zedat.fu-berlin.de), March 25, 2009

 

 

 

Nobody knows what Kim Jong-il and his fellow string pullers (whoever exactly that might be) are up to—and what they are actually doing inside the boundaries of their kingdom. This is probably the first obstacle one encounters when trying to tackle North Korea. The considerable lack of reliable information is a problem not only in science, but also in politics, economy and journalism. For diplomats and businesspeople it is common to know only half of their partners motives though, and reporters may fill gaps of knowledge with entertaining, sometimes inspiring speculation. Scientists, on the other hand, are usually expected to base their work on hard facts: Their sources are their capital and without capital there is not much going on, even in academia.

 

 

In February a workshop at the Institute of Korean Studies at Free University (Berlin) offered insights on how young scholars approach this problem. Prof. Dr. Lee Eun-jeung, recently appointed head of the institute, had invited nine doctoral candidates from all over the country to present their dissertation plans about modern Korea at an informal roundtable discussion. The three (out of nine) participants whose presentations explicitly dealt with North Korea used various approaches and likewise their strategies of information gathering differed.

 

 

Eric J. Ballbach (Berlin) wants to interpret North Korea's participation in several security-related multilateral initiatives in Northeast Asia, such as the Northeast Asia Cooperation Dialogue, the Council on Security Cooperation in the Asia Pacific and the Four- and Six-Party Talks. Challenging the common 'isolation thesis' (multilateralism does not play any significant role in the foreign affairs of North Korea), Ballbach's point of departure is the fact that since the end of the Cold War North Korea did get involved in an increasing number of multilateralisms—more or less successfully. But instead of taking a global perspective from which the integration of North Korea into world politics might seem like a failure, he wants to explore the motives behind these collaborations from the perspective of the North Korean government.

 

 

This change of frame—multilaterality as an aspect of national foreign policy rather than international politics—raises new questions: Are there recurring patterns in the behavior of North Korean diplomats? Can the slow changes in Pyongyang's positions be attributed to 'learning processes' that might lead to a slow opening towards the international world in the future? Judging from empirical data, does more participation on behalf of North Korea lead to more commitment to the cause? Or—as the title of Ballbach's paper suggests—does the Juche-leadled government use "Multilateralism as a Strategy" to guarantee foreign support and attention?

 

 

In contrast, Liana Kang (Trier) explores the—now historic—bilateral relations between the German Democratic Republic and its 'socialist brother state' North Korea. While all documents that were kept in the East German embassy in Pyongyang have been destroyed, many primary sources on this matter, such as letters, records of conversations and memorandums, remain in archives in Germany, awaiting their discovery.

 

 

Kang plans to use these hardly explored sources to find out more about the methods North Korea applied to face its main dilemma: how to minimize security risks that come with the badly needed help from abroad. As a showcase for possible outcomes of her research, she discussed the situation of North Korean students who were sent to Germany since the early 50s in order to acquire expertise in mostly technical subjects. Under surveillance both by North Korean authorities in fear of information leaks and the East German secret police who did not completely trust the Asian 'brothers', the data files that this group of some hundred young people stimulated throws light on the ambiguous and paranoia-ridden relationship between the two states.

 

 

Kang and Ballbach both work towards an expanded knowledge on North Korean practical politics and decision making. The research of David Shim (Hamburg) on the other hand does not take the 'North Korean problem' as a given fact. Focusing on the recent nuclear crisis and the Six-Party Talks that were consequently held, he rather wants to analyse the discursive processes that constructed this 'problem' in the first place.

 

 

According to Shim, a hegemonic discourse highlights the military threat imposed by North Korea—which could alternatively be interpreted as defensive measures, considering the preemptive strike on Iraq by US-lead forces—and at the same time downplays regional and global interests of the other parties involved. This "particular shared understanding" echos in the mass media: For example, when Kim Il-jong declared North Korea a nuclear power in early 2005, the frontpage of Der Spiegel, a leading German weekly journal, showed a smiling 'Dear Leader' in front of some mushroom clouds: "Madman with a Bomb".

 

 

All three approaches promise new insights on the most secluded country in the world. Whether the results justify the expectations remains to be seen. In any case, the interests of young scientists today will shape the academic discourse of tomorrow. In this regard it seems as if the future of Korean Studies in Germany will not end at the 38th parallel.