A cronym s and A bbreviations viii A cknow ledgem ents xiFurther Notes on Romanisation and Citations xiv INTRODUCTION C ontentious A ctivism and Inter-K orean R elations 1 Research Question: Activism and Inter-Korean Relations Central Aims Inter-Korean Relations: A Review of Existing Approaches Traditional Approach 5 Alternative Accounts o f Inter-Korean Relations 8 Political Activism and Inter-Korean Relations: An Approach at the Intersection ofIR and Korean Studies 13 Central Argument 15 Methodology 17 Conceptual Framework 18 Selection o f Historical Case Studies 22 Fieldwork Methods 27 Significance of the Research 33 Organisation of the Thesis 34 CHAPTER ONE P olitical A ctivism , D iscu rsive Pow er and N orm N egotiation

No abstract

No abstract

Organisation of the Thesis 34 CHAPTER ONE P olitical A ctivism , D iscu rsive Pow er and N orm N egotiation 37 Korean boats patrolling the Northern Limit (maritime demarcation) Line crossed over and fired at South Korean navy ships. Five South Korean navy men were killed, and a high speed patrol boat was sunk. (Lee, Hong-yung. (2003). "South Korea in 2002: Multiple Political Dramas". Asian Survey, 43 (1), 64-77.).24 Smith. Hungry fo r Peace, p.24 25 The terms 'defector' and 'refugee' are highly politicised in the South Korean context as both suggest a political motivation behind an individual's decision to leave North Korea and settle in the south. Nor is 'migrant' an appropriate moniker: North Koreans are by birthright 'Korean' and cannot be considered 'migrants' in the traditional sense of the word. The Ministry of Unification recently conducted a review of this terminology and developed an official nomenclature for former North Korean citizens now living in South Korea: s 'a e t 'öm in , which can be roughly translated as "new settlers". (Ministry of Unification. (2005). "Peace and Prosperity: White Paper on Korean Unification". Seoul, pp.100-101) Kim Dae Jung (Kim Taechung) and Roh Moo Hyun (No Muhyön) governments' seemingly one-sided approach to inter-Korean relations, has been that of North Korean human rights. In the mid-to late-i990s, anecdotal evidence regarding the repressive nature of the DPRK regime started to emerge, raising concerns in South Korea and abroad that egregious human rights violations were taking place inside the secretive state. By the time progressive politician Kim Dae Jung was elected into office in 1997, news of the North Korean human rights situation was slowly becoming common knowledge within South Korea. The main conservative opposition 'Grand National Party' (GNP) accused Kim Dae Jung (and his successor, Roh Moo Hyun) of propping up a corrupt and repressive regime through their engagement policies, and demanded that the issue of human rights become a component of inter-Korean dialogue. These two governments, however, refused to countenance demanding greater transparency in the DPRK's human rights situation, arguing that such an approach would be counter-productive and would even signal the death knell to cooperative relations between the two countries.The accusations thrown by both sides of the political spectrum on this issue give a good indication of the norm-driven ideological cultures informing the various positions.Those in the 'pro-engagement' camp accused their detractors of harbouring a pro-US anti-North Korean political stance, aimed ultimately at bringing about regime change in North Korea by any means available. These supporters of the governments' position also accused their conservative opponents of endangering the achievement of peace and stability on the Peninsula which, so the argument went, was possible thanks to the South Korean governments' careful and measured approach to inter-Korean relations and engagement, which reflected the will of the citizens of a new...

No abstract