South America's view on North Korea's human rights situation
By Choi Seon-wook
Nowadays, one of the biggest stories around the world is North Korea’s human rights situation. Despite a handful of obstacles, the Third Committee of the United Nations approved a resolution condemning “the longstanding and ongoing systematic, widespread and gross violations of human rights” in North Korea. The resolution is notable for containing for the first time, “the consideration of the referral of the situation in North Korea to the International Criminal Court” because the North Korean government has failed to protect its population from “crimes against humanity.”
In contrast with Asian stakeholders and superpowers, we tend not to give much attention to the positions held by South American countries regarding North Korean issues. However, it is worth giving ear to them, considering our expectations and hope that the resolution will be passed not only in the U.N. General Assembly but also in the Security Council. Moreover, we had better understand South American political positions in context of the accelerating Asia-Pacific integration process. The votes that each South American country has cast from the 60th session of the U.N. in 2005 to the present may lead us to understand how they view North Korea’s human rights situation.
First of all, there are strong advocates and an objector in South America. Since 2005, Argentina, Chile, Paraguay, Peru and Uruguay have constantly been in favor of the adoption of resolutions denouncing North Korea’s human rights situation, while Venezuela has voted in opposition. Argentina and Chile, in particular, have a reputation for putting great emphasis on human rights. On the other hand, Venezuela has been supporting the North Korean regime since 1974, as it is also criticized for major human rights violations.
Different from the six countries above, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia and Ecuador have changed their votes once or twice over the last decade. Bolivia has changed its vote from “in favor” to “abstaining” right after Evo Morales, who is known as one of the strong advocates for Venezuela's Bolivarianism, became president in 2006. Lately, Bolivia has voted against the adoption of the resolution on North Korean issue in company with Venezuela.
Brazil has cast votes in favor of the resolutions except only at the 63rd and 64th sessions. Roberto Colin, Brazilian ambassador to North Korea, explained in an e-mail interview with Voice of America that Brazil abstained from those votes with the purpose of encouraging North Korea to participate in the international system, even if the Brazil’s position in principle has never changed at all.
Colombia has voted “in favor” since Juan Manuel Santos took office as president in 2010. He is considered a more pro-American and conservative leader than his predecessor Alvaro Uribe Velez, who seemed to want to distance himself from the sensitive North Korean issue.
Since Rafael Correa, a strong advocate for “Chavismo,” was elected as president in 2007, Ecuador has cast a blank ballot on the issue except this year. Meanwhile, the Ecuador government permitted the inauguration of the “Kim Jong-il Library” at Guayaquil University in 2007. In addition, the Maharishi College of Technology of Ecuador presented the title of honorary professor in 2009 to Kim Jong-il, the father of the present leader of North Korea. It proves that Rafael Correa’s Ecuador has been very friendly to North Korea. In this sense, it is not surprising that Ecuador voted against the resolution this time.
Taken together, 64 percent of the votes that South American countries have cast until now in the United Nations were “in favor,” 11.3 percent were “against” and 24.7 percent abstained. To sum up, the resolutions concerning North Korea’s human rights situation has won the majority of the votes from South America. Moreover, the fact that there is no abstention ballot in the recent voting of the resolution on North Korean issue tells us that South American countries now have firm and clear viewpoints about the issue in the contemporary “Pacific Age,” instead of being indifferent and uninvolved.
The writer is a researcher at the Centro Asia Pacifico UDP (Diego Portales University Asia Pacific Center) in Chile. Contact him at
.