While sorting out
the old news in the archives I uncovered a treasure of foreign contact
with North Korea as a result of the Supreme Leader's passing on
December 17, 2011. Kim Jong Il's death, as I see it, was a chance for
friends of the regime to re-assert their political ties and for those
nations, who have the most to lose if the political accession of Kim
Jong Un went/goes awry, to reinforce the status quo as the most likely
source of stability with the DPRK.
There
are a number of articles here dealing with the international reaction
to Kim Jong Il's passing. Predictably, the bordering nations of Russia, Japan, and China
have offered their condolences whereas any mention of South Korea
seems to be missing. Also to no surprise are the Latin American nations
Cuba and Venezuela standing in solidarity with their communist brethren. A notable exception is an official letter from the Vietnam. Syria's Bashar Al-Assad
sends best wishes for the Kim Jong Un's future, perhaps a nod for the
any nuclear technologythat made it his way during Kim Jong Il's tenure
as chief N. Korean nuclear scientist.The remaining few are a mixed bag. Why Uganda's President Museveni, Equatorial Guinea's Mbasogo, Sudan's President Ahmad Al－Bashir, Cambodia's King Norodom Sihamoni and Mongolian Head of State Tsakhiagiin Elbegdorj
all felt the need to support North Korea in its time of transition and
mourning escapes me. And of course there is 39th US President Jimmy Carter.
For the domestic take on Kim Jong Il's passing the letters Rodong Sinmun published from the Worker's Party of Korea can be read here.
Truth be told these condolence letters seem bizarre. I was in Poland when Lech Kaczyński died and the outpouring for not only him but the 95 other people on board really struck me. There were tiny blurbs about everyone and what honors and achievments they had earned and some of the victims had their political lives detailed (and sometimes criticized.) Other nations leaders offered their condolences and shared their mutual successes and histories. In comparision, the Polish tragedy's news coverage really stikes me as an organic, emotional response to a national loss of identity, however the North Korean media reports are formulaic and personally I find them unconvincing. Here Hugo Chavez, "voiced the belief that the Korean people will surely achieve the prosperity of the country." Medvedev claimed these words as his own, "In Russia His Excellency Kim Jong Il is well known as the leader of a friendly state who did a lot for the strengthening and development of the traditional Russia-DPRK good neighborly relations." These passages are devoid of any real substance. There is nothing but vague ideas and formless relationships alluded to in these messages.
I found the North Korean responses to be the most convincing but still based in the broadest generalities, which lack any true substance by which I mean any criticism (good or bad) of any concrete policy, action, or fact of life. I'll leave you with Kenichi Ogami's condolence letter he wrote to Kim Jong Un:
For the domestic take on Kim Jong Il's passing the letters Rodong Sinmun published from the Worker's Party of Korea can be read here.
Truth be told these condolence letters seem bizarre. I was in Poland when Lech Kaczyński died and the outpouring for not only him but the 95 other people on board really struck me. There were tiny blurbs about everyone and what honors and achievments they had earned and some of the victims had their political lives detailed (and sometimes criticized.) Other nations leaders offered their condolences and shared their mutual successes and histories. In comparision, the Polish tragedy's news coverage really stikes me as an organic, emotional response to a national loss of identity, however the North Korean media reports are formulaic and personally I find them unconvincing. Here Hugo Chavez, "voiced the belief that the Korean people will surely achieve the prosperity of the country." Medvedev claimed these words as his own, "In Russia His Excellency Kim Jong Il is well known as the leader of a friendly state who did a lot for the strengthening and development of the traditional Russia-DPRK good neighborly relations." These passages are devoid of any real substance. There is nothing but vague ideas and formless relationships alluded to in these messages.
I found the North Korean responses to be the most convincing but still based in the broadest generalities, which lack any true substance by which I mean any criticism (good or bad) of any concrete policy, action, or fact of life. I'll leave you with Kenichi Ogami's condolence letter he wrote to Kim Jong Un:
We were planning various congratulatory
meetings in the new year full of joy to mark the 70th birthday of the
great General Secretary Kim Jong Il.
Juche idea followers of the world were
expected to gather in Pyongyang, picturing to themselves 2012 in which
the gate to a thriving nation would be opened.
I cannot repress sorrow, greatly shocked by the sad news that Kim Jong Il passed away.
He was very busy with the work to carry forward the revolutionary cause of Juche and make the DPRK a model of the world.
We suffered the sorrow of losing the
general secretary too early as he traversed the road of revolution only
for the sake of people, not caring for himself.
But he provided a sure guarantee for
carrying forward the revolution generation after generation and
achieving the final victory of the Juche cause.
We will in the future take the road of
Juche forever together with respected Your Excellency Kim Jong Un,
successor to the ideas of the great President Kim Il Sung and General
Secretary Kim Jong Il.
We express deep condolences over the demise of Kim Jong Il.
Keine Kommentare:
Kommentar veröffentlichen