NOT so long ago, when we wanted to learn why hostile leaders were hostile, we studied their ideologies. Nowadays, having learned that ideology is either dead or an arbitrary system of signs, we analyze leaders by “putting ourselves in their shoes” — in other words, by assuming that everyone thinks the way we do.
So it is that North Korea watchers who speak no Korean can confidently tell the rest of us what motivates Kim Jong-il.
Ahem, most of the North Korean watchers I know (Andrei Lankov, anyone?) actually do speak Korean fairly well, though some of the more casual watchers are more preoccupied with posting links to naked German chicks (right; NSFW, but we're all going to lose our jobs in this economy anyway, eh?).But it gets better, I promise. He points out that he, Meyers, knows stuff that the NK watchers in Washington and New York don't know, which is the real reason the Dear Leader is engaging in brinkmanship and why the US (and its allies?) should temper their response: KJI is trying to show that he can bring a nervous America to its knees and the Washington-Tokyo-Seoul triumvirate should just stop playing his game:
Thus, with the announcement of the imminent missile launching, the dictator is not trying to get Mr. Obama’s attention so much as his own people’s. It is not merely a question of carrying out the threats of the anti-Lee rhetoric, rich in allusions to a pending comeuppance, that have filled the party newspapers since last fall. The now-familiar cycle of North Korean provocation, American warnings, North Korean follow-through and American calls for more peace talks — calls that are always mocked as an abject surrender — must turn every few years if the “military first” regime is to justify its existence and give heroic meaning to the people’s hardship.So maybe the answer is to do nothing. Just let KJI's melodrama play out. But I wonder if allowing Japan to shoot it down (over Japanese territory, of course) would be a good response. While that would give the North Korean ruling elite a new and powerful bogeyman to rally the people against, at least it wouldn't show that the JUSK triumvirate is all bark and no bite. And maybe China, fearing a resurgent Japan, might actually work a little harder to get its client state back in line.
Just thinking out loud.
Lankov and a few other's beside , i agree with the contention that the majority of neutral 'north korea observers' are korea illiterate.
ReplyDeleteespecially those dogs running and lobbying washington and state, and the dudes beating off for north korea publishing phenomena.
how about we do a list of names in a rough order of prominance of their standing in the media 'north korea analyst' stakes, then analyze their actual credentials.
after crossing out the ex military, sychophantic kyopos, and former seoul (japan) based journos, their wouldnt be many contenders.
But their are, and lankov is just one of many, just they don't peddle their opinions on the web and the korea times as some form of buley for a book deal.
there not their, burley not buley.
ReplyDeleteother than that, the above is a perfectly composed piece and can stay as it is.
there not their, burley not buley.
ReplyDeleteOkay. I thought you were trying to say "bully pulpit" or some such.
other than that, the above is a perfectly composed piece and can stay as it is.
Ah, that made me laugh.
emily wrote:
ReplyDeleteLankov and a few other's beside , i agree with the contention that the majority of neutral 'north korea observers' are korea illiterate.
I am inclined to agree, but I want to point out that there are quite a few exceptions.
Professor Lankov, I think, understands North Korean so well because he himself was raised (initially at least) in a Stalinist state, so he can spot the real reasons behind the b.s. That makes him a unique observer, irrespective of language ability.
I know Mr Breen, but I'm not the biggest fan of his work, since he often is merely combining shallow analysis with stereotypes that have gained currency in the expat community, prettying up the words, and then putting them in book form. He isn't particularly insightful, but he resonates with people who have the same biases.
He's a nice guy, though.
In addition to the echo chamber of the K-blogs, there is the echo chamber of the foreign press corps, which meets for cheap beer in their press club and reinforces — only rarely challenging — each other's superficial take on the issue of the day.
The first time I ever heard anyone seriously make the case that Kim Jong-il is not crazy was in graduate school at Yonsei, where an impassioned student — not a Korean, incidentally — logically argued that KJI is acting very rationally, but with goals very different from the West.
Yet at the same time the people who bring Korea to the kitchen tables of the Brits, the Americans, and pretty much the rest of the world were just running with the idea of "Oh, that nutty Kim Jong-il." (The Japanese reporters were a bit of an exception.)
especially those dogs running and lobbying washington and state,
Under both the Republicans AND Democrats, or more one than the other?
and the dudes beating off for north korea publishing phenomena.
Um, I'm not really sure what you mean here. Explain?
how about we do a list of names in a rough order of prominance of their standing in the media 'north korea analyst' stakes, then analyze their actual credentials.
Ha ha... that would be dangerous, perhaps. A lot of them are journalists who have merely focused on this as a field because there are so few experts. Their credentials are that they've reported on it before.
I myself am not much better, only that I actually have a master's degree in Korean Studies, but many of those courses had nothing to do with North Korea per se.
after crossing out the ex military, sychophantic kyopos, and former seoul (japan) based journos, their wouldnt be many contenders.
Well, is it fair to cross out ex-military just because they're ex-military? I think there should be more reason than just that. I know enough ex-military who do some type of analysis to know that they don't all think the same: many are hawkish or hard-line, but some are quite the opposite.
And who are you counting as sycophantic kyopo?
But their are, and lankov is just one of many, just they don't peddle their opinions on the web and the korea times as some form of buley for a book deal.
True that.
Under both the Republicans AND Democrats, or more one than the other
ReplyDeleteBoth and all.
beating off for NK publication phenomena is a reference to the tendancy of anyone with cursory involvement in the periphery of NK affairs such as US ambassadors and foreign journalists to retire on a tome of NK-related material.
And who are you counting as sycophantic kyopo?
generally (but not limited to) second generation immigrants that felate Uncle Sam to prove their american-ness (victor cha, barbara hwang, etc)
By your response it seems you are becoming more critical of these media-hogging commentators that dwell on the fringes of Korean Studies , but i don't know if you can credit a piece of paper from GSIS at yonsei (read: shit course)with that developing ability. Keep up the good fight.
Oh, and i like the idea of a non-hawkish military type, I'll try to work that into my next stand up routine