Seoul in quandary over anti-NK leaflets

US experts: Leaflet distribution might increase tension on peninsula

Van Jackson, visiting fellow at the Center for a New American Security

Leon Sigal, director of the Northeast Asia Cooperative Security Project at the Social Science Research Council

Terence Roehrig, professor at U.S. Naval War College

By Kang Seung-woo

The South Korean government is struggling with the decision of whether or not to control the launch across the border of balloons filled with leaflets urging North Korean people to revolt against their leader.

The distribution of the leaflets, organized by North Korean defectors-turned-activists, has long been a major source of tension between the two Koreas and has led to an exchange of heavy machine-gun fire between the two countries on Oct. 10. But Seoul has dismissed Pyongyang’s demands to ban the campaigns, citing the people’s right to freedom of speech.

However, the government has recently come under fire for neglecting to monitor the campaign, which is threatening to jeopardize the unexpected conciliatory mood between the two Koreas. On New Year’s Day, North Korean leader Kim Jong-un proposed an inter-Korean summit, to which the South responded positively.

Owing to the lack of government response, political groups, including the ruling Saenuri Party, have stepped up efforts to keep the distribution of the anti-North Korea leaflets in check.

“The government’s negligence in the distribution of the leaflets has hurt inter-Korean ties to an extent,” Rep. Shim Yoon-joe of the Saenuri Party said in a radio interview on Wednesday.

Saenuri spokesman Rep. Kim Young-woo also said, “The freedom of speech should be protected, but should it endanger others, it is another matter.”

A high-ranking official of the Presidential Committee for Unification Preparation said in a recent press conference the leaflet campaign needs to be restrained because it can jeopardize inter-Korean dialogue made possible by the current conciliatory mood on the peninsula.

In addition, the Uijeongbu District Court ruled last week that the authorities can restrict the scattering of the leaflets if it jeopardizes public safety amid the North’s threat of military retaliation, cornering the Park Geun-hye administration’s policy on the leaflets.

However, the government has yet to change its stance on the distribution of the leaflets despite the North’s National Defense Commission’s request to clarify its position on the issue.

The Ministry of Unification, which is in charge of North Korea affairs, made an equivocal response to the issue. Its spokesman, Lim Byeong-cheol, said last week the ministry respects the court’s ruling and will continue to seek appropriate measures to protect its people from potential attack from the North.

Lim, however, added, “There is no change in our basic stance that the leaflet campaign is associated with the freedom of speech.”

Further, he did not provide a direct answer to questions about whether the government has plans to preempt such leaflet launches in the future.

President Park also did not propose a specific plan in Monday’s New Year press conference to handle the leaflets in an effective way, saying the government will focus on both freedom of expression and safety of residents in border towns.

U.S. experts say the South Korean government needs to discourage the leaflet campaign rather than just stressing freedom of expression.

“I think the (South) Korean government should find creative ways to discourage the leaflet campaign, but it should not try to make it illegal,” Van Jackson, a visiting fellow at the Center for a New American Security, said.

“Free expression _ even at great risk _ is crucial to a democratic society. But since a government has responsibility for the security of its people as well, I think it’s fair for the government to discourage the leaflet campaign in favor of something more subtle.”

Leon Sigal, director of the Northeast Asia Cooperative Security Project at the Social Science Research Council, said, “In the United States, freedom of speech does not extend to shouting fire in a crowded hall. As a recent exchange of fire on the DMZ suggests, that is all the ballooners are doing.”

U.S. Naval War College Prof. Terence Roehrig said most rights in a democratic system, including free speech, are not absolute and has limits, especially when these rights may infringe on the rights of others or contradict broader societal rights.

“The South Korean government is in a difficult position. The difficulty here is that the debate over free speech overlays an important policy question _ policy toward North Korea _ where there is strong disagreement,” Roehrig said.

The professor added that protections for rights such as free speech are often very important to safeguarding unpopular or minority views.

“Democracy thrives when debate and expression of ideas from multiple perspectives is allowed to flourish. The most difficult test of these rights often comes in the realm of national security where security concerns can be used to suppress free speech, but there are also times when the good of the state and public safety may supersede the free speech rights of individuals,” Roehrig said.

He added that decisions in these matters are difficult and it is important to let constitutional courts work through these challenging issues.

Some North Korea experts, however, question the effect of the propaganda leaflets.

“I support the principle of the leaflet campaign, but I think it’s too high-profile and not effective enough. There are ways to get information into North Korea that the world media doesn’t need to see,” Jackson said.

Roehrig said, “Given its reaction, North Korea is clearly concerned, but it is not certain to me that sending these balloons across the DMZ will have much effect on the North.”

A South Korean activist plans to launch balloons carrying DVDs of Sony’s “The Interview” toward North Korea, which raises concerns over increasing the tension on the peninsula. The film’s plot depicts the fictional assassination of the North Korean dictator.

“It has a benefit of socializing North Korean people to the idea that Kim Jong-un can be challenged,” Jackson said.

He continued, “For South Koreans, there is of course concern about ‘agitating’ North Korea, but North Korea’s threats are rarely credible; this is a fact. The question is simply how we can identify those rare instances when North Korean threats are credible, but I don’t think its recent threats meet the threshold of credibility.”

However, Sigal said the government should thwart the plan.

“Appearing to encourage (the) assassination of the North’s leader is asking for trouble. It should be easy for the Park administration to discourage such behavior as needlessly provocative,” he said.