By Alexander James
The death of Kim Jong-il in December has pushed North Korea to the forefront of the world’s imagination. Scenes of mass public grief, cases of hereditary political succession and a leader so unknown that even his age is open to speculation have all added to a belief that the DPRK, surely, is a state unlike any other.
Some, however, have found great attraction in North Korea’s peculiar ideology. Characterized as everything from ``apologists” to ``useful idiots” pro-North Korean groups have steadily been on the rise in the West ― especially since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991.
Whilst it may be no surprise that dyed-in-the-wool communists have taken up its baton, it seems odd that supporters of a ``Korean-only” brand of racial communism have rooted within societies that boast a near absence of historical, cultural or social links to the Korean Peninsula.
The United Kingdom serves as one such example of a country that, historically speaking, has had little association with Korea, yet boasts more than its fair share of pro-North Korean organizations.
The largest of these falls under the umbrella of the Korean Friendship Association (KFA). Reportedly operating within 120 countries worldwide, the KFA provides its members with everything from patriotic videos and tours of the DPRK to a souvenir shop.
Well funded, well supported and, to a certain degree, well coordinated, the U.K. branch of the KFA plays an active role ― from hosting the North Korean ambassador to the United Kingdom to issuing denouncements of the latest ROK military exercises. By November, 2011, the U.K. branch had contributed to 43 percent of the KFA forum’s articles.
Two other pro-North Korean organizations also seek to extol the perceived virtues of DPRK-style socialism to the British public ― the Juche Study Group of England (JIGSE) and the Association for the Study of Songun Politics in the UK (ASSPUK).
At first glance, both groups appear to operate in much the same way as the U.K. KFA ― re-posting KCNA articles, penning revisionist histories, berating the ROK and even organizing annual ``barbeque and summer parties.” Yet greater independence seemingly emboldens both groups, with each adopting a notably more belligerent line towards the ``enemies” of North Korea than the KFA.
Public displays of unity and camaraderie, as seen regularly in the group’s ``joint statements,” evidence their solidarity. But delving deeper into their organizational structures reveals that, as Aidan Foster-Carter recently speculated, overlaps in their memberships and hierarchies are glaringly evident.
For instance, just three people fill the posts of chairman, secretary-general and organization secretary of JIGSE; official delegate and organization secretary of the U.K. KFA; president of Staffordshire KFA; and president of ASSPUK.
Misrepresentations aside, there is nothing improper with joint memberships of any political grouping; indeed, it is to be expected of marginal political organizations. But when notions of solidarity, depth and support are eluded too which fail to make clear that solidarity is an unavoidable necessity, rather than a choice, then their place in the U.K.’s political consciousness becomes clearer.
Perhaps this is the critical point. As with North Korea’s thinly-veiled facade of power, when one scratches beneath the surface of Britain’s pro-North Korean groups their ahistorical claims, flaccid belligerence and threadbare memberships are as glaring as their deity’s. The United Kingdom therefore, need not fear their existence, for whilst it may be its freedoms of choice, expression and association that allow such groups to operate, crucially, it is also these principles that undermine their meaning and their message.
As Joseph Conrad wrote in “Heart of Darkness,” voices may echo loudly but this is only because they are ``hollow at the core.”
The writer is a U.K.-based freelance journalist. His email address is Alexander_p_james@hotmail.co.uk.