North Korean Defector BASHES Clinton's Naive, Failed Policy on Pyongyang; Praises Bush Approach

Frontline (Through "North Korea Cafe") ^ | Recent | Frontline (Through "North Korea Cafe")

[AmericanInTokyo]

Hell On Earth

(Translated from Original Korean): "Interview With Mr. Kim Duk Hong, High Ranking North Korean Defector"

Kim Duk Hong is one of the highest ranking officials to defect from North Korea. He escaped from North Korea in 1997, first to Beijing and then to Seoul, along with Hwang Jang Yop, the architect of the North Korea regime's ideology known as "Juche," meaning "self reliance." Kim was Hwang's assistant for many years. He is officially barred from talking to the press by the (appeasing) South Korean government, however, FRONTLINE obtained this exclusive interview at an undisclosed location in South Korea. The interview was conducted in Korean and has been translated.

Q: Why did you defect?

When I was 20 years old, I realized something was wrong with North Korea. Only people who had connections could succeed in that society. I was thinking of defecting as far back as 1958.

Q: So you waited more than 40 years before defecting. Why did you take so long?

Before I left, I studied Marxism and Communism. I realized that Kim Jong Il's government is following Marxism literally. At this time, I thought that someone should speak up about this, so I did.

Q: Did you have contact with Kim Jong Il?

It is really hard to contact him. Even people who live in the same area, they report to him and respond to him by fax only. He barely speaks, only at a few parties. A middle class person like me hardly gets a chance to see him.

Q: How did Kim Jong Il control the country?

He controls his administration exclusively. It operates absolutely by his word. It's an autocracy. Although people have been suffering for 50 years, Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong Il used to be like gods. Kim Il Sung used to kill people who didn't like his administration, but nobody blamed him. People thought that it was politicians' fault, not his fault. People have begun to realize that Kim Jong Il is wrong, he is killing people.

Q: From the Clinton administration's point of view, they were able to negotiate a freeze of the nuclear plant at Yongbyon. Didn't that slow the nuclear program?

Of course, I think the Clinton administration was great. The United States solved the problem peacefully. It was historic. [But the North Koreans] resumed the development of nuclear weapons as soon as they signed the Geneva Agreed Framework, even before the ink dried on the paper.

In 1995, the national military industry secretariat went to Pakistan to trade skills in exchange for producing nuclear weapons. They sent engineers to Pakistan after they signed for Geneva Agreed Framework in 1994. They began to talk about nuclear weapons with Pakistan 1995. It is true.

Q: Do you believe that Clinton administration was naive in dealing with Kim Jong Il?

First of all, I think that they didn't know North Korea, Kim Il Sung or Kim Jong Il. That was their big mistake.

Q: What is Kim Jong Il's ambition?

Firstly he wants to have nuclear weapons. My complaint is that the United States gives North Korea time to work on developing weapon programs. Kim Jong Il doesn't care that people are starving and poor. He spent almost all the money on nuclear weapons.

That's why I'm here. I defected to speak out about the starvation. I left my family, friends, and comrades in North Korea. I don't think that Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong Il are human beings. He's working only for his own ambitions, only for himself. If he had a sense of humanity, he wouldn't be this kind of leader.

Q: (The Bush) administration in Washington is taking a tougher line in North Korea. Do you think is it proper?

I think that Bush knows how to treat Kim Jong Il. Don't trust Kim Jong Il, never, ever. What Kim Jong Il is doing is producing nuclear weapons to kill people in the world, and providing expertise in nuclear weapon development to countries which are anti-American.

He kills our people, arrests people who are against his administration. He produces drugs. It's a national industry. He kidnaps other people from South Korea, or other democratic countries. He is doing all sorts of bad things, like the devil. Do not trust him, never, ever.

Q: What do you believe the United States can do prevent North Koreans from acquiring weapons?

The only way is to kill Kim Jong Il. Possessing nuclear weapons is not dangerous. But the fact that Kim Jong Il has weapons is dangerous. I think that's why the Bush administration treats Kim Jong Il the way they do. Some people believe the problem can be solved by removing nuclear weapons in Yongbyon. However, if Kim Jong Il is still alive, he will make bombs again. I think that President Bush knows him. He is the only one who understands who Kim Jong Il is.

Q: But there are others who are critics of the Bush administration who believe that Kim Jong Il will be willing to deal away the nuclear program. Do you disagree with this?

I think two things: People who have never experienced their children or relatives being kidnapped from Japan or somewhere else and taken to North Korea, and then killed by Kim Jong Il, they say, "Peace, peace." People without knowledge about North Korea criticize without knowing.

Q: What policy do you suggest? Is war the only way to remove Kim Jong Il from power?

I think the Bush administration is right in being anti-North Korea. Blocking their economy, it's [a] good way.

[sal002]

I think the Bush Administration will eventually do exactly what I am saying. Appeasement requires sacrifice. Signing a piece of meaningless paper (which has been encouraged already by South Korea and Japan), requires no sacrifice.

[sal002]

Besides Bush is a pragmatist, right? He'll do what needs to be done, political consequence be damned.

[Just mythoughts]

The health care plan was stopped because of the secret method of devising it brought enough attention to enough people to actually read it.

Locking up doctors for helping was beyond even most loyal democrats. Another thing that stopped the health care plan was the fact that Clinton and his gang with algores help passed the largest retroactive tax increase in history and the very next election the Republicans took the House for the first time in 40 years.

The liberals are a bunch of elite pigs and see the rest of us as country idiots and their plans were grand.

They both hate the military and used and abused those in the military close to them. Coffee servers and all the rest.

Somalia was Bill's first job as commander-in-chief and he screwed that up so badly that all actions after that were done half-a$$.

"killing of the opposition" need not be done with a physical death, personal destruction as well as political, calling extremists nazi's and all the rest, wanting to starve children, taking away social security, lies. The would have to have total control before they would get to the path of physical removal of the opposition.

What was Kosovo all about anyway, and Serbia, still haven't figured out what that was all about.

The reason Clinton did not deal with Iraq is rather obvious today considering how much money the UN was raking in on the "Oil for Food program" as well as what Russia, France and Germany were collecting on their illegal deals.

Let's not forget all that Red Chinese money the Clintons and DNC and algore collected to win that 1996 election, and what the Red Chinese got in return.

[sal002]

Did you read it?

[Just mythoughts]

Parts, enough to realize that my own freedom of choice would be gone if it was enacted.

[sal002]

What parts?

I am just curious - I didn't spend enough time reading...much too long.

[Jim Noble]

A communist is a socialist who means it.

Hillary means it.

[sal002]

Perhaps...

I prefer to think of a communist as a Socialist who would kill to have his way....but either way, point taken.

Wasn't the Baath Party Socialist in Iraq? Why did it crush the Communist Party?

[Just mythoughts]

I do not have a copy, at the time parts were released and then the whole was available. There was a big legal fight just to find out who she had on the payroll.

I don't really feel like typing what I remember, however here are a few points.

Regional health care offices/divide up the country

No longer choice of which physician one could go to.

Physicians would be told whom they could care for.

Limitations on specialities.

Basically complete government control of all things medical

Come to mind right now, this was 8-9 years ago.

If you would like to find it it is probably available on- line somewhere, jail time for physicians for treating someone not designated was enough for me.

[sal002]

Really? The excerpts I had read never mentioned jail-time (though I imagine any such provision would be unconstitutional on its face). And from what I recall the impact on the average insured individual was minimal under the Clinton Plan. All analysis I saw was that the Clinton plan was a failed compromise between those who wanted a Canadian style system and people such as Senator Chafee from Rhode Island who wanted a more market based competitive universal insurance coverage system.

Now, the Congressional Democratic Plan offered at the same time was actual single-payor (ala Canada) and did do those restrictions.

I think there was large misinformation back then. Still, I am happy the plan didn't get enacted, but I don't think it is entirely fair to call it "Communistic" - that's just simple name-calling.

[Bob J]

Tonight, UNSPUN with AnnaZ!
6pm pdt/9pm edt

w/Special Guest Hostess Diotima! This week's guest: Dr. John Lott, Jr. Resident Scholar at The American Enterprise Institute. Plus as always CRBs & Bone-headed Lie-beral Quotes ...because you just can't make this stuff up. And... your calls!

Click HERE to LISTEN LIVE while you FReep!

Click HERE for the RadioFR Chat Room!

Miss a show? Click HERE for the RadioFR Archives!

[Admin Moderator]

It is hard for you to imagine different groups of leftists competing for the controls which can be used to enrich themselves?

[sal002]

I think the term leftist (also the term 'rightist') are overly simplistic. The Democratic Party has many different viewpoints - some of them are even openly in line with many of our party's platform (what's that guy from Georgia?). There are liberals (Daschle), there are socialists (Maxine Waters), and their are 'left-of-centrists'. The 'left-of-centrists' often cross over and support some of our causes...we need to reach out to them.

We have the same thing in our party. Social Conservatives (Gary Bauer), Libertarians (like me ;P ), and "Right-of-Centrists" (Chafee), as well as "Crazy" Conservatives Who Wish They Were Liberals (Buchanan)

To me, Clinton, as horrible of a person as he was, is a 'left-of-centrist'. So is Tony Blair - see how he helped us out?

[cibco]

Spot on...

[Just mythoughts]

The goal of this bunch is the transformation of our Constitution which at its foundation is that "RIGHTS" given to the individual by the CREATOR no government can take away.

That one very acknowledgement that the CREATOR gives what no man/government can or can take away sets this nation apart from all others on the earth.

Communism/socialism/liberalism is a belief that "MAN" can and should give, and they seek to replace the CREATOR with themselves.

[cibco]

Democracy is indispensible to socialism - V. I. Lenin

Democracy is the road to socialism - Karl Marx

The goal of socialism is communism. - V. I. Lenin

I have these quotes hanging nearby as a reminder.

[sal002]

I don't believe those people are as stupid as you say. To enact such fundamental change would require near total public support. It would be a fool to embark on the quest - and I think Clinton's slyness showed us he was no fool.

[sal002]

Right. However, Lenin is not in charge of any country, nor is Marx. What matters is what the people do.


I tend to think people who are Communist are less motived by the literal words of Marx, Tolstoy, Lenin, Disney and more by their own desire to stay in power.

Also, modern day Socialists have no desire to enact a Soviet style communist state....no one is THAT stupid.

[Just mythoughts]

They are a lot farther down the road than you think.

What they cannot pass with laws they get their activists judges to enact. They are never honest with their ideas and the only time they gain is when they convince enough that all is lost. Clinton claimed the economy of 1992 was the worst in 50 years an outright lie.

Then they raise taxes, and tear apart the fiber of the society.

I have not said they will win, but they are what they are and they have not given up their cause.

The Senate won't even allow a nomination for a judge to come to the floor for a vote, because he is considered too "right wing".

[sal002]

"too "right wing""

In politics, turn-aboout seems to be fair-play. I wonder if this is payback for Ashcroft blocking Ronnie White in 2000 because he once wrote an opinion overturning a death penalty conviction....sigh.

To me, judicial review by the Senate should be limited to the individual's ethical history. This political review has to go.