DPRK says no to reunification w/ KJ Noh – Ep 152 - Fortress On A Hill (FOH) Podcast

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Don (00:08):
This is Fortress On A Hill, with Henri, Danny, Kaygan,
Jo vonni, Shiloh, and Monisha

Jovanni (00:13):
Welcome everyone to Fortress On A Hill, a podcast about U.
S.
foreign policy, anti imperialism,skepticism, and American way of war.
I'm Jovanni.
Thank you for being here with us today.
On January 16th, D.
P.
K.
R.
leader Kim Jong un said his countrywould no longer pursue reconciliation

(00:35):
with South Korea and called forrewriting the North's constitution
to eliminate idea of shared statehoodbetween the war divided countries.
The heroic, the historic step to haltA long pursued policy of peaceful
unification based on a sense ofnational homogeneity comes at a time

(00:55):
when tensions between Pyongyang,Seoul, and Washington are rising.
With the two years old conservativegovernment in Seoul coming into power
with bellicose rhetoric against theNorth, with statements such as having
the right to launch preemptive strikesagainst the Northern Brother, the DPRK
increased weapons development launchingcruise missiles into the sea, and a recent

(01:19):
launch of reconnaissance satellite intospace, and Washington's ever provocative
military exercise in the Palenza andnear the DPKR borders and waters, which
the Pyongyang government plans seesthis as a rehearsal for an eventual U.
S.
rock invasion of his territory.

(01:40):
On January 24, Pyongyang toredown this huge arch sculpture that
symbolized unification with the South.
The Korean peninsula has beena single entity since the 7th
century, when the Silla dynastyunified itself under its rule.
The peninsula came under Japanese rulein 1910 and was liberated in 1945 with

(02:00):
the Soviet invasion from the North.
They defeated the Japanese thereand with the Americans defeated
the Japanese in the Pacific.
Korea came under the administrationof both the Soviets and the U.
S.
in 1945 with the peninsula, uh,when the peninsula was divided
into at the 38th parallel.
A brutal three year war was fought in theKorean peninsula between the American LED

(02:22):
UN Coalition and a North Korean Chinese,south Korean guerrilla front, which caused
a death of over 4 million Koreans and amassive destructions of the country from
1950 to 1953 and paused with an armisticeto this day, the peninsula remains in
a state of war heavily militarized.
And with the American presenceof approximately 28, 000

(02:45):
service members in the South.
Not counting the tens of thousandsmore surrounding the territory
in Japan, Guam, and other places.
Here to tell us more, wewelcome back to the show K.
J.
Noh.
K.
J.
is a journalist, politicalanalyst, writer, and educator,
specializing in geopolitics of Asianpolitics, Asian Pacific region.

(03:05):
He writes for Dissent Voice, BlackAgenda Report, Counterpunch, Popular
Resistance, Asia, Asian Times, M.
R., M.
R.
R.
Line.
He also does frequent commentaryanalysis on the news program, The
Critical Hour, By Any Means Necessary,Fault Lines, Political Misfits, Loud
and Clear, Breakthrough News, KPFAFlashpoints, and KPA Flashpoints.

(03:32):
Welcome back, KJ.

KJ Noh (03:33):
Thank you.
Pleasure to be with you.

Jovanni (03:36):
KJ, so, Let's, let's get to this.
So, what does it mean now that Pyongyanghas stated it will no longer be
pursuing reunification with the South?

KJ Noh (03:45):
It means that they're very worried about the escalations that South
Korea is initiating against North Korea.
There's a fundamental principlethat you have to apply anytime
you hear about a news from NorthKorea, and that is that you are
only being shown the reaction shot.

(04:08):
You're not seeing whatwas just preceding that.
And what just preceded that was thatSouth Korea had been escalating.
They say, well, North Korea,you know, designated, uh, South
Korea as its principal enemy,how nefarious and aggressive.
What nobody tells you is that principalenemy is the language that South Korea

(04:34):
has been using against North Korea, andNorth Korea simply reacting to that.
Same thing with every kineticor counter kinetic engagement.
There is always a SouthKorean slash US provocation.
So you're always being shownonly the reaction shot.
And that gives you the impression thatNorth Korea is aggressive and insane.

(04:56):
But that's absolutely a misrepresentation.
North Korea has given upon on a diplomatic solution
to the North South issue.
And that is because, clearly, the currentSouth Korean Yoon administration has gone
all in on aggression against North Korea.

(05:20):
Why has it done that?
Because it's doing thebidding of the United States.
It's a quizzling clientstate, which is, the U.
S.
is escalating against North Korea.
Not because North Korea is a threat.
But because the U.
S.
seeks to escalate against Chinaand North Korea is the pretext.

(05:43):
Or the Stalking Horse.
That is to say, uh, the U.
S.
is encircling China.
It wants to engage militarily with China.
Historically, uh, Korea, the KoreanPeninsula has always been one of the
key points with which to attack China.
Kind of a A bridgehead onto the continent,if you will, and it is using South

(06:06):
Korea's provocations against North Koreato escalate against North Korea, knowing
that the only country that China has amilitary alliance with is North Korea.
War with North Koreameans war against China.

Jovanni (06:23):
Indeed, and we saw this government in Seoul, um, when they
came to power in 2022, I believe, uh,they weren't even warm in the seat.
They didn't even warm their seat, and theywere already talking about, um, Seoul's
right for preemptive attacks againstNorth, uh, even with nuclear weapons.
Um, and uh, the North's supposedto sit, with that, and it's

(06:46):
supposed to be okay with that.

KJ Noh (06:47):
Exactly, right?
So, it is the South Koreangovernment, the South Korean Quisling
government, uh, under the promptingof the United States that has been
escalating in extraordinary ways.
And, um, they had talked about You know,preemptive attacks, uh, punishing North
Korea, uh, threatening North Korea.

(07:10):
They have done 20 strategicnuclear exercises against
North Korea in the past year.
20.
And so, from that standpoint, NorthKorea clearly has a few things
that might be of concern to itself,and therefore, you know, they have
reacted in, you know, a forcefulmanner, which is what they always do.

(07:36):
just again, you know, notto browbeat people over the
historical context, North Korea wasobliterated during the Korean War.
If you can imagine the devastation, thebarbarity and the devastation that is
being wreaked on Gaza, and you think aboutthat, and you expand that to 1, 000 fold,

(07:59):
where every inch of North Korean territorywas made to look like the devastation
of Gaza, and one third, between onefifth and one third of the population,
almost all civilian, were killed.
Then you understand why North Korea isslightly anxious when their principal

(08:25):
enemy does nuclear exercises against them.
Until 1991, the U.
S.
had nuclear weapons stationed.
On The Korean Peninsula.
Since 1953, it has routinely,in fact, since 1950, the US
has routinely threatened NorthKorea with nuclear annihilation.

(08:47):
Colin Powell threatened to turn NorthKorea into a charcoal, briquette.
I mean, that's unthinkable, becauseNorth Korea was turned into the
world, world's largest barbecue pit.
And there was so much napalm droppedon, you know, North Korea, you
know, that it was just turned intoone long smoldering barbecue pit.

(09:09):
And US leaders, you know, routinelythroughout this kind of language.
And so, of course, North Korea isgoing to be anxious when it sees vast
military strategic nuclear exerciserehearsed against it on its doorstep.
You know, it's one of those places where,you know, where the paranoia is justified.

(09:32):
In fact, I would say thatregardless of how paranoid they
get, it's probably never enough.
South Korea rehearses decapitationdrills of North Korea routinely,
and in the past year, uh, therewere 200 days, uh, in which the U.
S.
and South Korea rehearsed militaryexercises, uh, against North Korea.

Jovanni (09:56):
Indeed, and, you know, one has to consider also that, what precedes action
is usually rhetoric, action doesn't comeout of the blue, it's always preceded by
rhetoric, and indeed they're, um, basedon their experiences, and also based on
what's happening around the world, theWest is pretty much lighting the whole
world on fire, going back to, uh, 2023with with the whole, speech about the

(10:16):
axis of evil where they included, Iraq,Iran, and, and North Korea into these
axes of evil, coming out of the blue.
So indeed, there is, justification fortheir paranoia, for their, uh, concerns
of, of the security of the nation.
So, There's this article thatcame out by Robert Carlin and
Sigford Hecker, it's entitled,it's Kim Jong un preparing for war.

(10:41):
They write that Pyongyang has investedin peace and normalization with the South
and the Americans for the last 33 years.
But has been routinely betrayedand humiliated by the West.
From the Clintonadministration, to the Bush Jr.
administration, to the Obamaand Trump administration.
It now feels that all optionshave been exhausted and every
strategy has ended in failure.

(11:02):
What's your take on that?

KJ Noh (11:03):
It's a very interesting article and people, um, my colleagues
who have been reading this, we'veall been mystified by the article.
There's one piece of truth inthat article, which is that
North Korea has made good faithefforts to engage with the U.
S.
and with the West for decades.
It's tried.
It's put its best foot forward.

(11:25):
And it's absolutely true that the U.
S.
has betrayed and deceivedNorth Korea at every point.
For example, you just talkedabout the axis of evil statement
that George Bush came out with.
Well, I mean, that statement came out.
Even just as North Korea was enteringinto talks, uh, you know, to give up its

(11:48):
nuclear weapons in exchange for peace.
That's what North Korea hasbeen suing for since 1953.
What it wants is security.
He wants to live in peace.
And the U.
S.
has thwarted that at every single turn,because it needs North Korea, first to

(12:09):
feed its military industrial complex,but also because North Korea, as I said
before, has always been a stalking horse.
For North Korea, itjustifies the presence of U.
S.
troops on the peninsula,and it allows the U.
S.
to project vast power into the Pacific.

(12:30):
It allows the U.
S.
to maintain operational control.
over South Korean troops to this day.
So it's true that much is true that NorthKorea has put its best foot forward to
negotiate and to engage in diplomacy.
And it's also true that North Korea seemsto have given up on on this process.

(12:53):
And I think it was a long anddifficult choice that it made.
But what me and my colleagues aremystified with is that the the that
Carlin and Hecker say that NorthKorea has, because North Korea
has stopped attempting diplomaticengagement, It has to go to go to war.

(13:21):
That is to say, there's no in betweenbetween disengagement and war.
It's just a simple binary.
And when you read the article carefully,and, you know, Colin and Hecker are,
quote unquote, experts on North Korea.
So it this This leap of logicis very, very troublesome.

(13:43):
When you read the article and tryto figure out why North Korea has
decided to go to war, well, they say,this is because North Korea is crazy.
It's insane, which, youknow, doesn't mean anything.
It's just standard.
You know, it's always, but the otherthing they say is that North Korea has to

(14:06):
fight Because it has run out of options.
Okay, what does that mean?
That doesn't make any sense.
It still has plenty ofoptions short of war.
The only way that makes sense is Ifthe United States was planning to

(14:27):
attack North Korea, then it has to.

Jovanni (14:32):
They're further right that, uh, although Pyongyang's, I'm quoting
here, although Pyongyang's decisionmaking often appears Ad hoc and
short sighted, in fact, the NorthKoreans view the world strategically
and from a long term perspective.
Beginning with the crucial strategicdecision by Kim Il sung in 1990, the
North pursued a policy centered onthe goal of normalizing relations

(14:55):
with the United States as abuffer against China and Russia.
After initial movement in the directionwith the 1994 agreement framework,
In six years of implementation, theprospects for success diminished when,
in Pyongyang's eye, successive U.
S.
administrations pulled awayfrom engagement and largely
ignored North Korean initiatives.

(15:16):
Even after the agreed frameworkfell apart, the North tried to
pull the US back into serious talkswith giving unprecedented access
to the nuclear center at Young,young to one to one of us Hecker.
During the Barrett, during theBarack Obama administration, the
North made several attempts thatWashington not only failed to probe,

(15:38):
but in one case rejected out of.
There is much debate in the UnitedStates whether the North was ever
serious and whether dialogue was simplya cover for developing nuclear weapons.
Your thoughts?

KJ Noh (15:51):
Well, I do think that they were serious because they
made serious efforts to engage.
They certainly, allowed themselvesto be strip searched by the West.
They allowed the West into theirfacilities and they had unbridled access.
They even, you know, cameras weremonitoring Yongbyon all the time.
Uh, HECR went in, I thinksix times into the country.

(16:15):
They blew up some of their, youknow, infrastructure, uh, et cetera.
So there were clearly, good faith effortsmade, uh, and so I think it's pretty
dishonest of Hecker and Carlin to saythat they weren't because they were there
on the ground and they knew how seriousand in earnest, uh, these efforts were.

(16:36):
And it also contradicts their mainpremise, which is that they say that
North Korea made good efforts and nowit's disappointed, uh, that, you know,
that These efforts didn't bear fruit.
I mean, if they want good faith efforts,then of course, what would you expect?
And so there's some internalcontradictions there.
But I think the key thing which isimportant here is that Hecker and

(17:00):
Carlin say, we must Consider a worstcase, that Kim has convinced himself,
after decades of trying, emphasis,decades of trying, there is no way
to engage the United States, andtherefore, therefore, uh, they have made
the strategic decision to go to war.

(17:23):
That's the piece thatdoesn't make any sense.
And as I said, it doesn't make senseunless you fill in the missing, uh,
premise or assumption that the NorthKorea is preparing to respond to a U.
S.
attack.
Then It makes sense.

(17:43):
The hidden premise that the U.
S.
is getting ready to wage war, you addthat to the picture, then you understand
why North Korea has run out of options.
So my question to Carlin andHecker is, is this a leak?
Is this a trial balloon?
Is it a projection?
Is it a slip of the tongue?
But this notion that it's North Koreathat's planning to attack, uh, because

(18:08):
it has run out of options doesn't makeany sense unless you add in another
piece of the picture, which is thatNorth Korea is preparing to defend itself
against attack from the United States.
And everything that I've seen indicatesthat the logistical preparations, as
well as you pointed out, the rhetoric areescalating seriously in that direction.

(18:34):
I'll add, yeah, I'll addone more piece to this.
So why would, uh, Hecker andCarlin write this article, uh, what
privileged access do they have to U.
S.
plans, because they certainly don't haveprivileged access to North Korea, nobody
does, uh, their information about NorthKorea is as good as yours and mine, but

(18:59):
they may have privileged access to U.
S.
plans because, it boilsdown to this, If the U.
S.
is planning some kind of kineticengagement in Korea, uh, if the U.
S.
is planning kinetic engagement againstChina, Korea is the most logical place.
Because it is the place where the U.
S.
has the greatest overmatch,uh, against its opponent.

(19:23):
Because the force disposition, thepreparation, as I said, because the U.
S.
has operational control over 3.
6 million South Koreantroops, including reservists.
But North Korea is no longer a free lunch.
It has nuclear weapons.
Initially, you know, a few yearsago, as you and I know, the U.
S.

(19:43):
moved the 8th Army garrison toPyeongtaek, Camp Humphreys, right?
And that was to move it outof the range of North Korea's
Conventional artillery fire.
Yongsan is dead in the centerof the capital city, Seoul.
It's as if Central Park in New Yorkwere being occupied by a military.

(20:06):
So, but they moved the 8th Armygarrison out of Seoul I moved it,
you know, 80 miles further away.
That takes it out ofconventional fire, if you will.
It's kind of a castling maneuver.
But in the period between, you know,that maneuver and the current moment,

(20:27):
North Korea now has nuclear missiles andOther missiles, longer range missiles,
uh, essentially, you know, scuds,uh, that can do real damage anywhere.
And so, North Korea hashas its own counter move.
So, if the U.
S.
is planning for some kind of kineticengagement against North Korea,

(20:49):
it needs to assess the risks.
It wants kinetic engagement, but itdoesn't want to be completely uncontained.
And I don't think it wantsto go immediately up the
nuclear escalation ladder.
It doesn't have good intel, certainlynot good human on North Korea.
So it probably reached out to some ofthe few experts who really know Korea,

(21:11):
and that would be Carlin and Hecker.
And so they probably had adialogue with Carlin and Hecker.
Asked them to assess, you know, if there'skinetic engagement, what are the chances
that North Korea would go immediatelyup the nuclear escalation ladder?
Uh, and in this dialogue back and forth,maybe a few questions were asked or maybe

(21:32):
a few hints were dropped that made bothCarlin and Hecker very, very nervous.
So they, you know, probably said to eachother, you won't believe the dialogue I
just had with the State Department andthe Pentagon, do you think that the U.
S.
is considering kinetic action?
Uh, and, and then they wrote this article.

(21:53):
So, there's a missing premisehere, and that missing premise,
I think, is that the U.
S.
is having dialogues and assessmentsabout its, uh, capacity to engage
in kinetic war against North Korea.
And Carlin Hecker writing this article,it pre frames the narrative so that

(22:15):
if war happens, uh, they can say,look, you know, we warned this would
happen, uh, and, and then once again,we are only shown The reaction shot.

Jovanni (22:25):
Yeah.
The effect.
Yeah.
The aftermath.
Yes.
Indeed.
Indeed.
Not only that they, the troops were movedfrom Solopiontec, also northern troops,
troops that were stationed up norththat were redeployed also further south.
And not only further south, they were alsotaken away from the peninsula, redeployed
to places like in Japan and, uh, Guamas well, to, further create that space.

(22:48):
Between the North and battlefieldbetween the North and the South.
Um, I also recall a few years ago whenthings were escalating with the North.
I believe it was, uh, Lindsey Graham, uh,was reassuring his constituents that, you
know, if war were to break And, and theKorean Peninsula, uh, not to worry because

(23:10):
the war will be fought over there, notover here, and then pretty much the people
who will be dying will be dying overthere, not over here, and this includes
the South Koreans who will be dying aswell, but not Americans, which I find
that hilarious that, that people in theSouth would go along with this policy,
knowing that it were, were to break out,there were, there would be obviously, um,
you know, hindered, You know, as well.

KJ Noh (23:33):
Yeah, no, that's a really good question.
And, you know, this is how the U.
S.
likes to wage wars, right?
It's people over there.
You know, we fight over there sowe don't have to fight over here.
But more than that, we get the peopleover there to fight our enemies so
that we don't have to do the fighting.
It's all, you know, using proxy forces.

(23:53):
But the cynicism and the lack ofhumanity in that statement is not
only appalling, but it's so evident.
We see this in Ukraine.
We see this, you know, beingprepared in Taiwan as they prepare
to turn Taiwan into another Ukraine.
And of course, it has alwaysbeing the case for South Korea.

(24:16):
South Koreans have, you know,participated in all American wars.
They've sent their, young troopsas cannon fodder, but also they
were used as essentially the firstkinetic front line in the Cold War.
And as, you know, as we pointedout, four million Koreans died.
So this has been the atrocious,atrocious cause of these wars and

(24:41):
the kind of Machiavellian cynicism ofpeople like Lindsey Graham, really,
you know, psychopathic thinking.
But, you know, I'll justdraw your attention to one
kind of historical piece of.
Trivia, which not many people may beaware of, was that in 1968, about one

(25:03):
week ago, the North Koreans actually senta group of 31 commandos into South to
assassinate the South Korean dictator.
Um, and if this had been successful, Ithink history would have been different.
And I also think that a lot ofSouth Koreans would have been

(25:23):
very happy because Park Chung hee.
The dictator was extraordinaryin his brutal oppression
of the South Korean people.
But this North Koreanmission to decapitate, uh,
Park Chung hee, uh, failed.
And the reason why it failed, uh,was that the, the North Koreans, they

(25:46):
sent, they sent these troops, uh, andthey infiltrated North Korea, but, um,
they were discovered by two farmers.
And, you know, so you're on a,you know, top secret, you know,
assassination mission, and youhave been found out by civilians.

(26:07):
Well, what would you do?
Well, what the North Koreans did wasthey, you know, spoke to the farmers,
uh, and they essentially, uh, justgave them, uh, some cigarettes, And
gave them a lecture on solidarity andhow they were, you know, uh, you know,
working, you know, for the benefit of,you know, all Koreans on the peninsula,

(26:31):
uh, which I think a vast majorityof South Koreans would have agreed
with, uh, and then they set them free.
And then these, uh, South Korean farmersimmediately Ratted out, uh, these North
Korean, uh, commandos, and then theentire peninsula was turned into a red
alert, you know, multiple divisionswere sent on a massive manhunt, uh, for

(26:56):
this, uh, you know, Special forces team.
And still the special forces team managedto penetrate within a couple of hundred
meters of the presidential palace beforethey were eliminated in a firefight.
So to this day, South Korean troops,you know, talk with a kind of grudging

(27:17):
admiration, you know, for the skilland courage of these North Koreans.
But, um, I think what, what that tellsus there, you know, is that at the
time, uh, you know, the North Koreanleadership and the North Korean cadre and
the military really thought of the SouthKorean people as compatriots that they

(27:40):
were seeking to liberate from, you know,an extraordinary, brutal dictatorship.
I think they're not wrong there.
But, um, I think that what has happenedover the decades, uh, is that South Korea
has been so deeply indoctrinated intokind of a colonial mindset that they

(28:00):
no longer see themselves as Koreans.
They're like, you know, forexample, people in Taiwan Island.
who see themselves as partially Japanese,partially Western, or people in Hong Kong,
in the Hong Kong colony, uh, that, thatsaw themselves as part, partially British.
And so South Koreans have become very,very Americanized, very Westernized.

(28:22):
And I think that difference in thatdistinction, uh, I think has reached,
you know, led the North Korean leadershipto move to towards less of a sense of
communality and solidarity with thepeople itself, which is very sad, because,
the vast majority of people in SouthKorea have direct family in North Korea.

(28:47):
It's, you know, everybodyhas a kin in North Korea.
And it's this extraordinarypolitical, uh, division, which has
created this vast, uh, gap, bothculturally and, uh, ideologically
that, that all sides suffer from.

Jovanni (29:06):
Indeed, I mean, the Korean peninsula has been one entity, I mean,
since, I mean, under one rule andone entity, one people since the, uh,
7th century, uh, and this, uh, thiswas only broken recently in 1945.
Um, so pretty much the Koreanpeninsula has been united
longer than it has been divided.

KJ Noh (29:25):
Absolutely.
Yes.
So it's been, uh, united from theunified Chile era, you know, with small
exceptions for about nearly 1400 years.

Jovanni (29:34):
Absolutely.
So, Pyongyang, uh, obviously seeswhat's going on geopolitically, sees
the geopolitical landscape shifting,see what's going on, sees the, the winds
of power moving away from the West,uh, towards China, Russia, Iran, uh,
India, and other global majority states.
You know, we've seen, they're seeingthat Europe, for example, you know,

(29:55):
they, uh, They have, they're deindustrializing at a massive scale.
Um, they see the crisis in Americanpolitical, social, and economic politics,
see how, how that's pretty much justpretty much tearing from the same.
Um, so with the West setting firesall over, you know, in every region
of the world, right, do you feelPyongyang is factoring this into

(30:17):
the geo strategic calculation?

KJ Noh (30:20):
Certainly, they're aware of it.
You know, the North Koreans arevery, very fine observers of the
geopolitical, uh, you know, situation.
Uh, they always balance carefullyand they always are strategizing.
Both tactically and strategically.
And so I think they're very,very much aware of that.

(30:41):
What is clear is that NorthKorea is strengthening its
relationships with Russia.
Now, just a quick historical overview.
Remember, it was Russia, it wasthe USSR that liberated Korea.
From Japanese colonization, you know,the, the Red Army tore the guts out of

(31:06):
the Japanese Kwantung Army within twoweeks, the Kwantung Army, you know,
was this, you know, rolling atrocitymachine that actually functioned,
you know, You know, without takingcommands, you know, from the imperial
center itself, you know, it invaded,uh, China on its own initiative, and it

(31:28):
was occupying large parts of Manchuria.
And when the Red Army came in and,you know, essentially wiped out the
Kwantung Army, it surrendered, uh,then essentially Korea was liberated,
uh, effectively by, uh, the, the USSR.
And that should have been the end ofthe story, except they made an agreement

(31:52):
with the United States that the U.
S.
would, you know, do a caretakergovernment in the South, that Russia
would do a caretaker government inthe North, and it would be divided
along the 38th parallel, which led tothe North South split, because the U.
S.
eventually created a fraudulent Puppetstate in South Korea placed one of its
own puppets rather than allowing a unifiedelection in North and South, which is

(32:17):
what the vast majority of people wanted.
It's very similar toNorth and South Vietnam.
The reason why they did this, becausethey knew is if they had a popular
election, the country would have gonesocialist, because that's what all
the polls said, that 80 percent ofthe people wanted a socialist country.
And the US said, we cannot letcommunism get a start in the Korean

(32:42):
Peninsula, because it would be,it would have a head start against
any other place on the planet.
And so, inside that context, Uh, if weunderstand, um, you know, these kind of
shifting global winds, uh, in 68, uh,North Korea started to break a little

(33:06):
bit with, uh, the Soviet Union, and thenin 1991, the Soviet Union collapsed.
And that put North Koreainto a huge crisis.
For several reasons.
First was that North Korea was underthe Soviet Union's nuclear umbrella.
And when the Soviet Union went away,North Korea was, you know, exposed to

(33:29):
nuclear annihilation by the United States.
And in fact, the US Pointed, uh, itsnuclear weapons away from the Soviet Union
and against North Korea at that time.
So then that's when North Korea started tolook for an indigenous nuclear deterrent.
The other thing that happened wasthat it was also being sanctioned.

(33:50):
North Korea is highly dependenton the USSR for petrochemicals,
in particular petrochemicalfertilizer, because it's a very.
Uh, mountainous region, it cannotgrow enough food without extensive
use of petrochemical fertilizers.
And so when that became cut off, uh,North Korea started to enter into, uh,

(34:13):
food insecurity and then eventuallyinto a period called The arduous
march was essentially a long faminecaused by Western powers that were
trying to sanctioning it, sanctionit, uh, into, uh, into collapsing.
It didn't, but it suffered immensely.
And now, you know, the winds areshifting again, and you can see that,

(34:36):
uh, the United States and the West thathas been trying nonstop uh, since its
inception to try and destroy North Koreais fracturing, uh, inside itself and
there's centrifugal forces pulling apartthe global empire and this, you know,
500 year reign of Western colonialism.

(34:59):
North Korea is aware of all of theseshifts and changes and one of the
things that it's done is it's You know,restrengthened its alliances with Russia,
even as South Korea was sending hundredsof thousands of shells to the United
States, uh, to be used in Ukraine,Russia counterbalanced, reached out to

(35:22):
North Korea, uh, and invited it, uh,to, you know, its armaments factories.
Uh, when the United States placedthe Space Force in Tokyo and is
looking to open the Space ForceUh, in Seoul, well, North Korea
went to Russia's, uh, space center.

(35:44):
And so there's this continualtit for tat balancing that is
happening geostrategically.
And certainly over the long term, I thinkthat what will happen is, uh, North Korea
will simply Strengthen, reestablish,normalize its relations with the vast
number of countries in the global South,which it actually had more relations

(36:06):
than South Korea up until the 1980s.
It had, it had more strongerrelations with countries
than did South Korea itself.
And then also there's a continuousprocess, which most people
don't think is the case, butI think is very much the case.
Which is that North Korea is continuallystrengthening its relations with China,

(36:29):
it's closest border, as I said, it'sthe only country with which China has a
military alliance with, the only militaryalliance that China has is with North
Korea, and so what will happen, Uh,imagine is that eventually North Korea
will be pulled into part of the Beltand Road and the BRICS, uh, the SCO and

(36:52):
all the other Global South organizationsthat are moving towards a multilateral,
developmental solution, uh, for everybody.
The other piece that I'll add, and thisis also a very important part of the
equation, Uh, most people don't realizeit is that outside of the Arab world,

(37:12):
the first country outside the Arab worldto recognize Palestine was North Korea.
North Koreans have always beenprincipled in their support of, uh,
anti imperial liberation movements,but in particular, Palestine.
And I see, you can see that inthe statements that they have

(37:32):
made, certainly the moral support.
At one point, they were even sending,you know, armaments to the PLA.
And I think this South South realignmentis a powerful trend that is happening
that will include North Korea.
And it will show or it will demonstratethat North Korea, rather than collapsing

(37:54):
and crawling and submitting as it wassupposed to, has withstood, the worst
that the empire can throw against it.

Jovanni (38:03):
Indeed, it seems like these, uh, so called authoritarian states and
dictatorships and so forth has a Moreprincipled stance on global issues
than the so called democracies of theworld, the, uh, the West so far that,
you know, seem to talk from two sidesof their mouth, you know, you just made
a point right there with Palestine.

(38:24):
It's a clear cut case yet, everyone sees,every other state around the world, has
the correct approach, uh, what needsto happen, uh, with this case and,
and, with the case of, with Palestine,but the, but the West, you know.
Before, I'll get back to that, but Iwant, before that, I want to go into
what you just mentioned about the DPRKrelationship with the Global South, right?

(38:47):
Do you foresee the DPRK, breaking theso called diplomatic isolation and
Western sanctions by increasing itsrelationship with the Global South?
Do you foresee it?
Uh, eventually joining these, um,this, uh, multinational, regional,
international, uh, economic andpolitical blocks that are forming

(39:08):
around the world, like the BRICS andthe Shanghai Cooperations organizations.

KJ Noh (39:12):
I think so.
It's going to take a little bit oftime because there are institutional
barriers that have been put into place.
North Korea is technicallystill under sanctions.
It's still under UNSC sanctions.
So I think there has to be someeffort to remove those sanctions
before there can be full engagement,you know, on a normalized level.

(39:37):
But I don't doubt that thosethings will start to happen.
Uh, once again, I want to highlightthat North Korea has always had a lot
of connections to the global South.
It has a lot more legitimacy inthe global South than South Korea.
South Korea.
along with Taiwan was kind of thisaxis of fascism and imperialism.

(40:01):
You can think of Taiwan, South Korea, uh,South Africa, and Israel as being these
kind of, an axis of, imperial hegemonismand subcontractors to US dirty wars.
This is really the kindof work that they did.
And on the other hand, North Koreahas always been a principled and

(40:21):
impoverished It's But deeply principledsupporter of Global South Liberation.
You go to places all over Africa and youwill see, you know, vast monuments and
attestations to friendship and solidarityUh, and warmth towards North Korea,
because they know, what North Koreastood, how much it paid for it, and still

(40:45):
the principle, uh, stances that it made.
So, I think it's not going to bean immediate process, but certainly
it is an inevitable process.
Certainly, most notably, because, NorthKorea has this enormous border with China.
How could it not, uh, eventuallyjoin the BRI or the SCO?

Jovanni (41:04):
Absolutely.
Um, I mean, it's very neat, I mean, withthe BRI, you just mentioned the BRI,
which is a global development program.
Most countries in the world are signingup to it, eventually, Korea, it'll
be in the best interest, I believe, ofNorth Korea to also join this process.
So, let's shift gears.
So, the recent ICG verdict againstIsrael, your thoughts on it?

2 (2) (41:26):
Doesn't rule whether it is, but it has a case to answer, uh, uh, about that.
It accepts South Africa's, um, uh,narration of all of the acts that
South Africa says, uh, are genocidalacts, except those accepts those as
possibly, uh, constituting genocide.
It accepts South Africa's,uh, statement of all of the.

(41:47):
Uh, comments made by Israelipoliticians as intent for genocide as
being possibly intent for genocide.
Um, and, and then in the provisionalmeasures, uh, while it tosses the ball
into the Israeli court almost completely,uh, but what it does say is that,
for example, that Israel must ensurethat, uh, uh, it prevents the killings

(42:11):
of, uh, um, of members of the groupof Palestinians, uh, in Gaza, which
essentially means that it should stopkilling those members of those groups.
Now, I, let me just say this,that the best we could expect
out of this was a moral victory.
Israel was not going to implementanything that the court had decided.
They made that clear.

(42:31):
Netanyahu said that a fewdays ago, regarding the
court with disdain, actually.
And so what we did get is a moralvictory, a statement that the world will
not allow Israel to get away with itscrimes, that it will be investigated.
And I think for the global South.

(42:51):
A sense that international, uh,international law is also something
that is valuable for us and not justfor countries of the global north.

KJ Noh (43:00):
Well, I think there are a couple of takes you can have on it.
On the first level, it is a completeand total, almost a near total
vindication of, uh, south Africa'scase against Israel, which is that it
is plausible and there is a real risk.
That Israel is committing a genocide.

(43:22):
I think those facts are indisputable.
I think it's indisputable thatgenocidal intent has been expressed at
a policy level and has been expressedIt exercised on a tactical level.
I think that much is absolutely clear.
So the ICJ almost had no choice.

(43:43):
I mean, if it was to retain any legitimacyas an institution of international
justice, it had to find for this case.
Now, the issue is around thenature of injunctive relief,
because this is essentially likea, it's a temporary injunction.

(44:04):
It's like a cease and desistorder, a little bit like a
restraining order, if you will.
Now, the question that everybody'sasking is, why did the ICJ not
demand immediately a ceasefire.
So, there are two, uh, typesof interpretation of this.

(44:25):
One is, the cynical aspect, which isthat, The ICJ has found, rhetorically
and symbolically, in favor of SouthAfrica, but they've left an exemption.
Uh, and that exemption is a genocidesized exemption that essentially,
it didn't demand Israel to stop, uh,it, what, stop fighting immediately.

(44:50):
And therefore Israel will claim,we're doing everything else
that you told us to do already.
Therefore, we will continueto do what we're doing.
So that is the cynical interpretation.
And then the more optimisticinterpretation could be that although
the court did not use the word ceasefire,it made very, very specific demands to

(45:14):
stop acts of genocide, including killing.
Palestinians, including, you know,mentally torturing them, including making
conditions of life uninhabitable for them.
And so, in the particulars, thatamounts to a demand for genocide.

(45:35):
That's, there's no way that you canfollow through, uh, with those demands.
Without ceasing fire.
And so I think, and then there'sa one month follow up period
where Israel has to come back andreport on what it's been doing.
And in the meantime, South Africa canmake further demands of the court.
The finding has been made, theinjunction, has been granted.

(45:58):
And so I think this is actuallya real Uh, powerful step.
It not may be, may not be everything,uh, that everybody wanted, but I
do think it is a powerful step.
Certainly, I don't think that theperfect should be the enemy of the good.
This is a good first step.
And I think that, uh, Everybody,including the USC and the UNGA, uh, and

(46:22):
people all over the world should usethis, leverage this finding as a way
of, pushing forward towards a ceasefireand then eventually towards, complete,
legitimation of Palestine's demands fora state, whether that be one state or
two state, you know, that can be figuredout by the Palestinians themselves.
But in the meantime, I thinkwe have a powerful first step,

(46:46):
and I'm cautiously optimistic.
I think what we can say is that toa certain extent, the UN has kicked
the can down the road a little bit.
And I think what we have todo is make sure that the can.
Is going in the right direction.

Jovanni (47:02):
But this is the end here with this verdict, right?
It's going to further
continue.

KJ Noh (47:07):
Yes, yes.
I mean, this is a preliminary injunction.
It's a temporary injunction.
The case will actually take years.
But in the meantime, what you wantin a case where, the risk and the
vulnerability is so extreme, you wantthat preliminary restraining order.
And that is what the court has issued.
Opposition to what many cynicshave said would never happen.

(47:30):
We have that.
And so now it's incumbent upon anybody andeverybody with a voice to leverage it to
its maximum advantage in order to preventlives, in order to prevent the suffering,
the genocide of the Palestinians.
I think everybody can agree on that.
Eje, but how can this be enforced?

(47:52):
Um, you know, I'm not an expert on, youknow, UN, uh, international law, but, you
know, you know, the obvious thing is youtake this, you take it to the UNSC, it
already has the imprimatur of the ICJ,so it's highly, you know, uh, it's not
something that the UNSC has to debateamong itself, it's simply, uh, something

(48:14):
that the, uh, NSC can demand, right?
If the US chooses to, uh, veto it,well, certainly it will try and it
will delegitimate itself even further.
But then it can go tothe UN general assembly.
And then there are extraordinary measuresthat I think can be implemented at the
level of the, uh, un uh, ga and thenalso it can be referred towards the ICC.

(48:39):
Again, there's some legal, fine printthat has to be worked through, but
there can be a referral to the ICC.
And so, I think, one case is not thebe all and end all, but it opens the
watershed for other procedures to happen.
And so it's just a matter of followingup and creating this chain reaction
event that can make a real difference.

Jovanni (49:02):
Do you feel that apart from Israel being indicted here, do you feel
the whole international law Order orapparatus and the so called Western
values being, are being indicted as well?

KJ Noh (49:12):
I think in a certain sense, yes.
And I think the ICJ ruling is, is anattempt to pick up some kind of threadbare
fig leaf in order to show that, you know,we're not as genocidal and hypocritical,
uh, as, as is clearly evident.
So this is the fig leaf that they'reputting forward, but I say we use
this fig leaf, but absolutely, Ithink there's a foundational de

(49:35):
legitimation that is happening becauseof this, live screened genocide.
I mean, there have been genocides before,but for this to happen in real time, on
a billion screens across the world andthe United States and Europe and Germany
to say that it's not happening, that itdoesn't mean anything, I think the planet.

(49:57):
is in an outrage, as they should be.
And this is foundationally delegitimating.
The other thing that I'll also say,and this is, you know, once again,
um, astounding is that even as Israelwas genociding the Palestinians, the
US and Israel, you know, went to theUN and claimed that the Chinese were

(50:20):
committing genocide against the people.
In Xinjiang, right?
Now, this is absurd because, youknow, for the very simple reason
that there's no such thing happeningin Xinjiang, you know, the U.
S.
makes these allegations of genocide inXinjiang, but this is the only genocide

(50:41):
in human history that has no deaths, beenable to find a single body, no refugees.
Despite China having porous borderswith five Muslim majority countries,
preferential and privileged treatmentof the targeted group, that is to say
the Uyghurs were exempt from the onechild policy, they received preferential

(51:04):
treatment in school admissions andemployment, uh, and the population
was continually increasing, lifeexpectancy was increasing, birth rates
were multiples of the Han majority.
Continually improving satisfaction,continually improving economic
conditions, and there was no visiblehate speech against the Uyghurs.

(51:27):
In fact, there was no tolerance ofhate speech against the Uyghurs, and no
rhetoric targeting the Uyghurs whatsoever.
In fact, the Organization of IslamicCooperation, which represents
the rights of two billion Muslimsacross 56 countries, commended

(51:48):
China for its exemplary treatmentof its Muslim minorities.
So we know that this is Absolutelyand completely fraudulent.
Even the State Department's ownlawyers said that, you know, this
allegation couldn't be upheld.
You know, anybody can visit Xinjiangtomorrow, and they can see for themselves.

(52:12):
You know, uh, last year, over200 people 200 million people
visited Xinjiang freely.
It's not a sealed off state.
Anybody can go there anytime.
And they see everything is fine.
People speak their own language.
They practice their ownculture and religion.
They have rich, flourishing lives.
And on the other hand, I havetried, and many of my colleagues

(52:33):
have tried, to get into Gaza.
And right now, it's impossible.
In Gaza, there is areal genocide happening.
And all you have to do is contrastthe unspeakable Unspeakable barbarity
and atrocity happening in Gazawith the incredible flourishing

(52:53):
of life and culture in Xinjiang.
And you know that this Xinjiang genocidefraud is as much of a signal of the dying
empire as the genocide in Palestine.
It's, it's a foundationallyde-legitimizing.
Uh, violent, uh, lie.

(53:14):
In fact, it's the otherside of the same coin.
You're enabling and covering up a realgenocide while you are fraudulently
concocting a non existent one.
I think that is just foundationalde legitimation and it shows
how deeply corrupt Dishonest,hypocritical, mendacious the empire is.

(53:39):
These are the last legs of empireas it continues, you know, these
incredible lies and propaganda.

Jovanni (53:48):
Indeed.
I mean, there were a screen about a coupleof years ago, there was a screen off
the top of their lungs that, um, Chinawas committing genocide in Xinjiang.
They're also saying the same thingabout Russia and Ukraine when the
actual opposite was happening whenthe Ukrainians were the ones that were
committing ethnic cleansing againstthe Russian speaking population.
They're saying the same thing aboutSyria, that Syria, that the Bishar Al

(54:10):
Asad government was committing genocideagainst Sunni Syrians, when in fact,
the majority, the military is, is madeup of Sunni Syrians, but yeah, it's
absurd how, how they twist this, howthey create this reality, so they create
this fictitious, uh, fraudulent argumentswhere, but when you have actual ethnic
cleansing and genocide, beating you onthe face, you know, they, they'll say,

(54:32):
Nope, I don't see any genocide anywhere.

KJ Noh (54:34):
Exactly, exactly.
And this is why, you know, as otherpeople have called it, you know, the
empire of lies, just is relentless,it's high on its own supply.
And yet it is delegitimating andundercutting itself because it
believes that other people are asfoolish as to believe this, you

(54:56):
know, violent tapestry of lies.

Jovanni (54:59):
Absolutely.
Well, I think this is a goodplace for us to wrap up.
Uh, KJ, thank you so much for comingto the show and share your time,
thoughts, and experiences with us.
Any last comments before we depart?

KJ Noh (55:12):
Well, you know, once again, I want to point out that we are in
historic moments, historic times.
And I believe that each oneof us has a role to speak out.
To take action where we can, to takeaction with other people, and also
to not believe the lies, to not besuckered in by this mendacious propaganda

(55:37):
that is always being thrown at us.
We always exercise our criticalthinking, you know, it's like
having a healthy immune system.
You want to have a critical immunesystem so that you are not dragged
into this kind of miasma of Youknow, uh, imperial sickness and
that we all continue to fight.
We all have a role toplay because right now.

(56:01):
There's both danger and opportunity andof course the danger as we can see most.
Viscerally, you know, is, is,is what we see in Palestine.
It's, the genocide of along suffering people.
That plan, uh, is, is also what isin plan for the rest of humanity, if

(56:22):
we don't all take a stand together.

Jovanni (56:26):
KJ, uh, please tell us where can the listeners find you and find your work?
Um, and any information, what actionsyou feel listeners should consider.
You already said that, you know,take, um, join other people, but are
any specific actions you think, um.
People

KJ Noh (56:44):
should consider it.
Um, well, you know, I'm with anorganization called Pivot to Peace.
Um, uh, they're welcome to join us.
I also invite people to join Code Pink.
Code Pink has a campaign, uh, Chinais not our enemy, uh, which is
also that I'm, uh, associated with.

(57:04):
Anything that is an action insolidarity with Palestine and
for enforcing the ICJ's actions.
I encourage people to really put theirshoulder behind really, you know, the
fate of not just the Palestinians,but the fate, uh, the future of,
of our planet, uh, is at stake.

(57:25):
The balance, uh, of, of our, youknow, of justice is at stake.
So I invite people to go aheadand You know, really, you know,
uh, put some effort here right nowis, is a critical moment for us.
And as for my work, you know, if you,I, I don't recommend people use Google,

(57:45):
uh, because I'm essentially de factoshadow banned from there, but you can
go to websites like, um, uh, MR Online.
Uh, monthly reviewonline, um, counter punch.
Uh, I do a lot of analysis for,uh, you know, various shows, uh,
breakthrough news, uh, many criticalhour, uh, many Sputnik, uh, radio

(58:10):
shows, uh, as well as anything that'sprogressive and justice centered.
Uh, I, I tend to write for these, uh.
Publications and, and of course,uh, uh, Fortress On A Hill.
And I'm very, very honored thatyou invited me back to spend this
very, very meaningful time with you.

Jovanni (58:30):
Of course, we're very honored that you, that you came back
and, and, and spent some time withus and, uh, give us your analysis.
Um, all right.
Uh, thank you for joining ustoday and I hope To see you back
and, um, thank you, take care.

Henri (58:46):
Money is tight these days for everyone, penny pinching to
make it through the month oftendoesn't give people the funds to
contribute to a creator they support.
So we consider it the highest honorthat folks help us fund the podcast
in any dollar amount they're able.
Patreon is the main place to do that.
In addition, any support we receivemakes sure we can continue to provide

(59:09):
our main episodes free for everyone.
And for supporters who can donate $10a month or more, they will be listed
right here as an honorary producer.
Like these fine folks.
Fahim's Everyone Dream, Eric Phillips,Paul Appel, Julie Dupree, Thomas
Benson, Janet Hanson, Ren jacob, ScottSpaulding, spooky Tooth, and Helge Berg.

(59:37):
However, if Patreon isn't your style, youcan contribute directly through PayPal
at PayPal dot me forward slash Fortresson hill, or please check out our store on
Spreadshirt for some great Fortress merch.
We're on Twitter and @facebook.comat Fortress On A Hill.
You can find our full collectionof episodes at www dot

(59:59):
Fortress On A Hill dot com.
Skepticism is one's best armor.
Never forget it.
We'll see you next time.

All Episodes

DPRK says no to reunification w/ KJ Noh – Ep 152

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

24/7 News: The Latest

Crime Junkie

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}DPRK says no to reunification w/ KJ Noh – Ep 152