Condemning China, rejecting refugees
If ever there were a case illustrating the need to "think global, act local," it would be the problem of China repatriating North Koreans and the strong but mostly misdirected Western response.
On the global stage, Western leaders and international organizations have eloquently condemned China for repatriating North Korean refugees and they did so again late last year when China forcibly returned about 600 North Koreans. Back home, however, Western countries make it difficult for North Koreans to immigrate to freedom. They offer hollow applause, but not asylum, for North Koreans.
Having personally participated in protests in front of Chinese embassies as early as 2012, I share in the condemnation of China and North Korea. Could more North Koreans have reached freedom if Western countries had adopted more welcoming policies towards those who reached China?
Some Western leaders have tried to do something besides just talking. Nearly two decades ago, former U.S. President George W. Bush labeled North Korea an "axis of evil" and paved the way for North Koreans to be granted refugee status when he signed the North Korean Human Rights Act of 2004. Since 2006, around 220 or so North Korean exiles have legally found refuge in the USA.
Even that modest momentum has slowed down considerably. The year before the COVID-19 pandemic, the United States reportedly admitted only one North Korean refugee. As early as 2011, Roberta Cohen of the Brookings Institution reported that 107 out of 238 North Korean applicants from 2004 to 2010 abandoned their asylum applications to the USA because of paperwork and delays.
Canada’s 2016 census recorded that 970 North Koreans were residing in the country. However, five years later, that number had plummeted to 775. By 2018, Canadian authorities initiated the deportation of 242 North Koreans and were in the process of deporting an additional 512 after discovering many had already obtained South Korean citizenship before moving to Canada.
Canada has deported more North Korean refugees than the USA has accepted. Advocacy groups estimate that many North Korean refugees voluntarily left Canada to evade formal deportation.
In Europe, the U.K.'s All-Party Parliamentary Group on North Korea advocates for the rights of North Korean refugees, but more than one-third of the 1,300 asylum applications by North Korean refugees to the U.K. government were rejected between 2003 and 2018. The Diplomat reported in 2015 that Belgium rejected 99 out of 126 asylum claims. The Netherlands and France were even more stringent, rejecting all the applications they processed (128 and 19, respectively) from North Korean exiles.
I found those statistics and many others from newspaper articles and the websites of various countries. My organization, Freedom Speakers International, is now researching information from original sources to learn more deeply about the ways free countries block the immigration choices of North Korean refugees.
There are tears and strong statements about North Koreans being repatriated. If Western countries had been more welcoming before COVID-19 then China might have fewer North Koreans to repatriate back to North Korea.
The U.N.'s Commission of Inquiry on North Korea in 2013 documented shocking human rights abuses, accusing North Korea of "systematic, widespread, and grave violations of human rights." But the United Nations passed Resolution 2397 in 2017, ordering member nations to repatriate (yes, repatriate) North Korean workers.
Some countries deferring to South Korea as the default option may inadvertently limit the choices of North Korean refugees. South Korea has accepted approximately 34,000 North Koreans in the last quarter-century. Upon arrival, North Koreans are automatically granted citizenship under Article 3 of South Korea's Constitution.
Securing South Korean citizenship renders North Korean refugees ineligible to apply for asylum in other countries. Obtaining asylum in a different country makes them forever ineligible for services and support offered by the South Korean government to North Korean refugees.
After growing up isolated in North Korea and escaping into the unknown, North Koreans are expected to make snap decisions about where to go next in a mysterious world, probably without understanding the long-term consequences of their initial choice for asylum.
No single approach can comprehensively tackle all issues. Some Western leaders may highlight the legal and security challenges they face when processing asylum claims. China and North Korea may emphasize their unique challenges, although their excuses wouldn’t justify violating the human rights of North Korean refugees.
Instead of imposing conventional immigration policies on North Korean exiles, a grace period of six months to a year following their escape should be granted, providing them with adequate time to make informed decisions.
Hollow applause for North Korean refugees and tough talk directed at China and North Korea are not enough. Asylum, immigration and visa exceptions should be made for North Korean exiles so they can make informed decisions about where they will live once they are free.
Casey Lartigue Jr. (CJL@alumni.harvard.edu) is chairman and co-founder with Lee Eun-koo of Freedom Speakers International in Seoul, co-country representative of Giving Tuesday Korea, and a Seoul Honorary Citizen.