We have witnessed unforgettable scenes. I imagine all of us will remember the images of joy and sorrow, images that illustrate better than words the tragedy, but also the hope, of the people of the divided nation of Korea. Even if Shakespeare were alive, he could not adequately write about the human tragedy of the Korean people, said Jo Jin-young, a distinguished drama-writer in the North, as he met his 96-year old mother for the first time in 50 years.
If the North Korean writer is at a loss to find the right words, how then can a foreign observer comment on the heart-breaking scenes? Probably it is not possible for a non-Korean to grasp the intensity of such emotional encounters. I imagine it was equally impossible for non-Germans to be part of the emotional outburst that gripped the Germans on the evening of Nov. 9, 1989 when the Berlin Wall fell and hundreds of thousands, even millions of Germans rejoiced in a rare expression of national euphoria. Unlike Berlin, which has ever since stood as a symbol of peaceful unification, Korea's joy is not boundless. The reunions were overshadowed from the very beginning by the notion that very soon it would be time to say farewell again. The cruelty of this fact was augmented by the uncertainty of whether there would be any future meetings.
The emotional upheaval of the last week is to a considerable extent also the result of the media coverage. Personally I have my reservations about the way Korean television dealt with the reunions: Most of the family members were so overwhelmed by what was happening that they were obviously not in a position to control their emotions.
During my first years as a reporter my superiors had drummed into me that there are limits to what a journalist may record or put into picture, that every individual enjoys an unassailable right of intimacy, that this private and very personal sphere may not be invaded. Watching the TV-reports that memorable Tuesday, I had the feeling that this personal sphere had been rudely violated by sensationalist cameramen.
I discussed my aversion to this kind of reporting with a Korean journalist. He was in no way ready to accept my analysis: this, he said, was not a private event. These people were embracing and howling on behalf of 70 million members of the divided Korean nation.
no easy answers
As a German I am frequently asked what I make of the development of inter-Korean relations. As I am often confronted with this query, I long ago prepared a set of standard responses. During these very special days, I refrain from giving standardized answers and opt to expound instead on the political, economic and social differences and similarities between the Koreas today and the Germanies some 10 years ago.
In these emotionally charged times cold facts are not adequate to describe and explain the ongoing processes. More and more I have the feeling -- and I very deliberately use the term "feeling" -- that we are at the beginning of a new historical phase, that we are witnessing the beginning of a development, that may not be halted, that eventually will lead to the re-establishment of political unity on the Korean peninsula. We are not asking any more, whether reunification will come. The focus of our queries has become when this will happen.
The government of President Kim Dae-jung has left no doubt that the recent family reunions can only be the beginning.
The South is exerting pressure for further meetings to follow soon. For Seoul this is not only a matter of quantity, of increasing the number of individuals permitted to participate in the exchanges. Seoul is also concerned that the quality of the meetings should change: merely gathering in luxury hotels and attending organized official functions cannot be the final word.
It is good news that the two sides will soon get together to negotiate details for setting up a permanent meeting point and discuss visits between the home towns of separated relatives. During his meeting with the heads of South Korea, Kim Jong-il indicated that the North is ready for more exchanges in the near future. This is a sign of hope that this time there will be a follow-up, and that the experience of 1985 will not be repeated, when the first family reunion remained an isolated event.
At this juncture the sixty-four thousand dollar question remains: how far can the man who claims to be in the position to fix on his own the date of Korea's unification go? From his studies of contemporary history Chairman Kim must know that people-to-people contacts tend to have highly destabilizing effects on dictatorial regimes. So far the regime in Pyongyang has had every little detail of the personal exchanges under its control. The North Korean group (there was some unintentional irony in one South Korean reporter's referring all the time to the North Korean delegates) was made up of individuals who had one thing in common: each and every one of them was handpicked, they all belonged to a small group of the privileged, who have made it to the very top of North Korean society. The question which logically follows, whether Pyongyang will also allow ordinary people to participate in the exchanges; people, who might -- you never know -- prefer not to come back? In short: how sincere is Kim Jong-il, when he states, the North is ready for more meetings? A definite answer to these questions is not possible. The coming weeks and months will show to what extent action will follow the high-sounding words.
more exchanges?
The more people are included in the exchanges, the more difficult it will be to control every detail of the visits. This alone is a major challenge for a regime that is based on total control and constant supervision of its citizens. Supervision and control are two features common to all dictatorships. East Germany's communists also tried to control their population and prevent people-to-people contacts. Eventually they softened their position. They were motivated to do so by constant pressure from the West, combined with considerable financial hand-outs.
There are indications that the same is going to happen in the Koreas: economic concessions on the part of the South, concessions in political and humanitarian issues from the North. In this process of give and take both sides may actually deem themselves to be profiting. We may call this a win-win-scenario. Tradeoffs of this sort are the key to progress in inter-Korean relations.
Ronald Meinardus is the resident representative in Seoul of the Friedrich Naumann Foundation, the German foundation for liberal politics, which enjoys close links with Germany's Free Democratic Party.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations