Civic groups split on condolences

Members of conservative civic groups chant slogans to oppose offering condolences on the death of North Korean leader Kim Jong-il during a rally in front of the Government Complex in central Seoul, Tuesday. / Yonhap

By Kim Rahn

Civic groups and bloggers are divided over whether to offer condolences on the death of North Korean leader Kim Jong-il.

Liberal groups claim it is necessary to express sympathy for humanitarian reasons, with some already announcing their own messages of condolences, while conservative groups claim it is nonsense to sympathize with the death of a dictator who killed thousands of his people.

As the government tendered sympathy to the North Korean people Tuesday, progressive groups generally welcomed the move.

Peace Network said in a statement; “Controlling the situation on the Korean Peninsula stably and ensuring peace will benefit all countries including the two Koreas and the United States.”

The nation’s two umbrella labor unions, the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions and the Federation of Korean Trade Unions, sent telegrams of condolence to their North Korean counterpart.

But some called for more active moves, urging the government send a delegation to Pyongyang.

The People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy said, “There’s no reason not to send a delegation under reciprocity. Sending a delegation is only a custom and not doing it is a bad decision, so we ask the government to rethink it.”

Conservative groups, however, not only oppose sending condolences but also welcomed Kim’s death.

Some 150 members of six conservative civic groups said in a press briefing that Dec. 19 will be the first day of a new Korea.

“As human beings, we may have to express sympathy over a person’s death. But we won’t. How many people have to die in pain because of Kim Jong-il? During the time of the Arduous March, millions of North Korean people died. As a leader of a state, he committed countless crimes against the North, the South and the world,” they said in a statement.

“South Korea’s No. 1 enemy is dead, and it is absurd that the government expresses sympathy. If anybody wanting to visit the North to offer condolence, we’ll fight to stop them,” they said.

Another group, Right Korea, said, “The death of dictator Kim, who suppressed his people and starved millions of them to death, is nothing to be mourned. Most South Koreans welcome his death, regarding it as a signal for North Korea’s democratization.”

It added North Korean delegation came to pay condolences when former President Kim Dae-jung died only because he carried out pro-North Korea policies.

North Korean defectors’ groups also opposed sending condolences. “The era of dictator Kim Jong-il, who enjoyed omnipotent power for 17 years and gave pain to people, is over. We believe his death will be a momentum for North Korean people to entertain freedom,” they said in a statement.

Bloggers and tweeters also presented different opinions about condolences according to their political inclinations.

Roh Hoe-chan, a spokesman of the main opposition Democratic Unity Party, said on his Twitter account, “I offer my condolences. I hope the spirit of peacemaking and exchanges between the two Koreas will continue.”

Culture critic Chin Jung-kwon said on his Twitter, “It is waste of time to dispute about condolences. Politically, we can criticize a dictator, but diplomatically, we can make a gesture of friendship to such a person.”

But conservative critic Cho Gab-je said, “The government should not tender condolences. It is a lasting regret that we ourselves couldn’t get rid of the slaughterer.”

A Twitter user said, “How come we mourn the death of an incompetent dictator who starved millions of his people to death?” But another tweeter said, “A leader of a state died. Regardless of political ideology, it may be sensible to offer condolences.”