The LA Times has a remarkable (login required try bugmenot) article on a North Korean "businessman" which, it seems to me, deserves a good Fisking since it shows a picture of the regime that is rather different from the one we normally see.
N. Korea, Without the Rancor
A businessman speaks his mind about the U.S., the 'nuclear club' and human rights issues.
BEIJING — He arrived at the entrance to a North Korean government-owned restaurant and karaoke club here in the Chinese capital with a handshake and a request. "Call me Mr. Anonymous," he said in English.
This North Korean, an affable man in his late 50s who spent much of his career as a diplomat in Europe, has been assigned to help his communist country attract foreign investment. With the U.S. and other countries complaining about North Korea's nuclear weapons program and its human rights record, it's a difficult task, he admitted.
As the Armed LIberal points out, a diplomat from a communist country who has been "assigned" to do something does not correspond to the traditional definition of businessman, although Tim Worstall has noted that North Koreans do accept bribescommissions and do other shady deals which could define them as businessmen.
"There's never been a positive article about North Korea, not one," he said. "We're portrayed as monsters, inhuman, Dracula … with horns on our heads."
Unless all those reports of re-education camps and the like are in fact false then there would seem to be a good reason for this. Just last week those US Imperialists at the State Department pointed out the ahh glowing cigaratte burn of a human rights record that is North Korea.
So, in an effort to clear up misunderstandings, he expounded on the North Korean view of the world in an informal conversation that began one night this week over beer as North Korean waitresses sang Celine Dion in the karaoke restaurant, and resumed the next day over coffee.
If one wasn't a cynic one might wonder a little about the employment conditions of these waitresses given that other N Korea workers abroad seem to be more or less slave labour.
The North Korean, dressed in a cranberry-colored flannel shirt and corduroy trousers, described himself as a businessman with close ties to the government. He said he did not want to be quoted by name because his perspective was personal, not official. Because North Koreans seldom talk to U.S. media organizations, his comments offered rare insight into the view from the other side of the geopolitical divide.
And if you believe that he did this on his own initiative then I have a bridge to sell you. I mean its all very well trying to give an alternative perspective but do you have to be so uncritical?
He said better relations with the United States were key to turning around his nation's economy, which has nearly ground to a halt over the last decade amid famine, the collapse of industry and severe electricity shortages. "For basic life, we can live without America, but we can live better with" it, he said.
I expect that is partly true - life is a lot better with the US as an ally - but unless all the reports of famine are false, Basic life in North Korea would seem to be impossibly without aid from somewhere and the aid has frequently come from the USA.
Yet he voiced strong enthusiasm for his country's recent announcement that it had developed nuclear weapons. The declaration, which jarred U.S. officials, was not intended as a threat, he said, but merely a way to advance negotiations.
"Now that we are members of the nuclear club, we can start talking on an equal footing. In the past, the U.S. tried to whip us, as though they were saying, 'Little boy, don't play with dangerous things.' "
The definitions of threat and negotiations used in this sentence seem to be from the same dctionary as "businessman" was from. Was it by any chance edited by a G Orwell and published in 1984?
A colleague, a 55-year-old man also visiting from North Korea, nodded.
"This was the right thing to do, to declare ourselves a nuclear power. The U.S. had been talking not only about economic sanctions, but regime change," the businessman said. "We can't just sit there waiting for them to do something. We have the right to protect ourselves."
OK so a private businessman and his "colleague" just happen to be really keen on the N Korean government and its system. Forget that Bridge I have some mountains in Florida that just happen to be for sale at giveaway prices.
The North Koreans said they were keenly attentive to the language used by Bush administration officials in regard to their country. They were relieved that in this year's State of the Union address the president didn't again characterize North Korea as part of an "axis of evil," as he did in 2002. But they were greatly offended that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice called North Korea an "outpost of tyranny" during her confirmation hearings.
You think outpost of tyranny is offensive? do you think that just maybe there was a reason for this - see state dept report linked above.
"We were hoping for change from the U.S. administration. We expected some clear-cut positive change," the North Korean said. "Instead, Condoleezza Rice immediately committed the mistake of calling us an outpost of tyranny. North Koreans are most sensitive when they hear that kind of remark."
Yeah truth hurts doesn't it? Of course N Korea was totally blameless and never threatened to harm a fly. In the 1990s North Korea agreed to not develop Nuclear power or bombs in exchange for food and oil. Then after it has been shown to be lying it goes ahead and says "hah we've got nukes now" and this is not expected to upset anyone?
He believes that Americans have the wrongheaded notion that North Koreas are unhappy with the system of government under Kim Jong Il. "We Asians are traditional people," he said. "We prefer to have a benevolent father leader."
Curiously I note that very few other Asians seem to prefer a father figure benevolent or otherwise. And the way that so many N Koreans are willing to risk life and limb to escape from their "benvolent father" is clearly a malicious libel. As are the stories all these misfits tell.
He also said that U.S. criticism of North Korea's record on human rights was unfair and hypocritical. In its annual human rights report on Monday, the State Department characterized North Korea's behavior as "extremely poor." It said 150,000 to 200,000 people were being held in detention camps for political reasons and that there continued to be reports of extrajudicial killings.
I note that he doesn't quite manage to say that the report is untrue.
"Is there any country where there is a 100% guarantee of human rights? Certainly not the United States," the businessman said. "There is a question of what is a political prisoner. Maybe these people are not political prisoners but social agitators."
And its OK to lock up "social agitators" apparently. That's good to know, I expect that the US will immediately label all the detainees in Guantanimo are social agitators and thereby avoid all that horrible publicity.
While Westerners tend to stress the rights of the individual, he said, "we have chosen collective human rights as a nation…. We should have food, shelter, security rather than chaos and vandalism. The question of our survival as a nation is dangling."
Right... I'm impressed with the way this anonymous person apparently managed to say all this without bursting into hysterical laughter. But just in case no one has noticed countries in Asia which are not run by "benevolent fathers" seem to have no problems providing food shelter and security rather than chaos and vandalism. Its odd that and obviously its purely a coincidence.
The North Korean admitted that "it is no secret that we have economic problems," and he said North Koreans were themselves largely to blame because they let their industry become too dependent on the socialist bloc countries. After the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, trade fell sharply.
Oh really? lack of quality and free enterprise has clearly got nothing to do with it then. Those socialist bloc countries didn't go away in 1990 they just changed their politics. If there were actual demand for N Korea's products one suspects it would have remained.
But he faulted the United States for the collapse of a 1994 pact under which North Korea was supposed to get energy assistance in return for freezing its nuclear program. The agreement fell apart after Washington accused North Korea in 2002 of cheating on the deal, and the U.S. and its allies suspended deliveries of fuel oil.
So it looks like the N Koreans are better nuclear engineers that the Manhatten project. From being good boys in 2002 to a functioning bomb in 2005 is fast going. You'd think that maybe redirecting that energy and intelligence from bombs to say, agriculture, would be a good thing.
"Electricity is a real problem. We have only six hours a day," said the North Korean, who lives in an apartment in a choice neighborhood of Pyongyang, the capital. "When you are watching a movie on TV, there might be a nice love scene and then suddenly the power is out. People blame the Americans. They blame Bush."
Lets just ignore the fact that TVs are apparently rather scare and the similar total lack of 100 free to air cable channels in N Korea and lets ignore the way that living in a "choice neighbourhood" implies a certain dedication to the regime, apparently there's a hidden human right that says that all people in countries run by "benevolent fathers" have a right to free electricity provided by America.
He said as North Korea worked to change its state-run economy, it would look to China as an example and seek to change gradually. He didn't use the word "reform" — anathema to some trained under the socialist system.
"In the past, we were revolutionaries. But now we prefer evolution to revolution," he said. "We will try to learn from China's successes and failures."
Looks like N Korea will be evolving to unfettered capitalism then. Oddly enough that doesn't seem to go well with "collective human rights" and "benevolent fatherhood"
As for international negotiations aimed at getting North Korea to give up its nuclear arms program, he said he thought Pyongyang would probably show up at the next round of talks. But his country would prefer to negotiate directly with the United States, he said, rather than in six-party discussions that also include China, South Korea, Japan and Russia.
He said the Americans' insistence on including six countries had caused undue complications.
Again it would be cheating to note how this "private businessman" seems to be remarkably knowledgable about governmental negotiations. So I'll just be cynical and remark having to keep one's story straight is much more awkward when you have to spin five separate ones.
"If we sort out the problems with America, everything else will fall into place. The problems with Japan can easily be sorted out," he said.
The North Korean criticized some Japanese politicians' efforts to link the nuclear talks to the question of Japanese citizens kidnapped by North Korea in the 1970s and 1980s.
"This was something done by a few overly enthusiastic people long ago," he said. "We tried to make amends.
"Now people like Shinzo Abe [deputy secretary-general of Japan's ruling Liberal Democratic Party] are using it for political purposes and destroying the interests of millions of people."
Everyone knows that Japan is just America's poodle. But maybe yes Japan should let bygones be bygones even if the kidnap victims may still be alive. Good idea. Now lets also forgive Japan for being the colonial power in Korea from 1995-1945. What do you mean "that's different?" - it was "something done by a few overly enthusiastic people long ago".
The most important point the North Korean said he wanted to convey in the conversation was that his nation was a place just like any other.
"There is love. There is hate. There is fighting. There is charity…. People marry. They divorce. They make children," he said.
"People are just trying to live a normal life."
People are just trying to live a normal life but the government keeps on ruining it...
I cannot believe that the LA Times appears to run this piece of propaganda without any balance. This looks like the sort of unbalanced thing that bloggers would write. (Hat Tip: Winds of Change) Updates: Commentary also from the Marmot and Hugh Hewitt